Bill Gates says Emperor’s Clothes are Beautiful

So... Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer have decided to pony up a portion of their significant resources to support the effort to redefine marriage.   

Since the left suspends their usual antipathy for multi-national, high CEO salary paying, resource sucking, obscene profit making corporations when they decide to support redefining marriage, you’ll likely hear a lot about the wonderful business support there is in Washington for genderless marriage. 
How should we respond now that Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer apparently think relationships without a mother and father are equally good for kids? 

The emperor is still naked.

You probably know the story.  A whole kingdom became convinced that the emperor had a beautiful new wardrobe.  First they convinced the king, then his subjects, then the townspeople.  Soon the entire kingdom was having a parade to celebrate the new clothes of a naked king because people were afraid of what response they would get if they stated the obvious.

It took a child, who was too unsophisticated to understand peer pressure, to articulate what everyone really knew all along; the emperor is naked.

I don’t know Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer.  I don’t really run in those circles.  In addition, there are a whole bunch of things I would never feel comfortable challenging them on.  But I do know they’re wrong about marriage.

Why am I so confident? Because despite their impressive resumes, they don’t make the rules of the universe.  Just like me, they are subject and not lord. 

Imagine a scenario in which we decided that gravity needed to be done away with because it discriminates against wingless creates.  Having convinced all of our friends that we needed to get rid of it, we created a legislative body that passed a “flight equality” bill and declared that gravity no long applies to us.  In celebration of our legislative victory, with a sincere belief that we had freed ourselves from the law of gravity, we walked onto the roof of the Space Needle, in a cape, to celebrate our independence from gravity.

The moment we began our "flight" we would discover the limits of our legislative authority. 

So it is with the debate over the definition of marriage, which, really, is about much more than simply marriage. Do kids need moms and dads? Does gender matter? Is all sex good as long as its consensual?

We aren’t right because we’re smarter, richer, more generous, better neighbors, or better looking.  We are right about marriage because we don’t make the rules.

Your body can’t run on helium, it needs oxygen. Your car won’t run on water, it needs gasoline.  The human race was designed so that it is optimal for children to be raised by their mother and father. Proving this point simply requires significant experience with the alternatives.

I realize this is unpopular in some circles, but it’s still true. And there’s nothing any of us can do about it.  We can pretend that the rules don’t exist, but all we will end up doing is proving their existence.

Just like we would if we saw you standing on the edge of the Space Needle in the cape, those of us on this side of the debate are simply trying to avoid the inevitable pain associated by proving the existence of a law by trying to break it.  

True, the consequences of breaking these laws will not be as immediate as pretending there is no gravity, but they are no less certain.

I don’t say this with any particular pleasure.  I think I speak for a lot of people when I say it really would be easier for all of us if the laws of the universe allowed us to do whatever we wanted without any consequences; if there were no rules governing human behavior and relationships. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if every idea was equally valid? But, again, that’s not reality, even if Bill Gates and Steve Ballmer want it to be.

The question for the rest of us is, “if Bill gates and Steve Ballmer told you a naked king had beautiful clothes on, would you agree with them?” 


Posted by david Baird on July 6, 2012
At least my friends who are following the way of Jesus have decided to help. You have the Koch brothers and you would yelp at the good people who are helping the poor and downtrodden. Get a life
Posted by Roy S on July 6, 2012
Kari R's question is logical, balanced and fair. If there is a Creator-God who brought everything into existence, wouldn't such a Being have the "right" to design marriage? Would this "right" depend upon the agreement of the creatures or would it be absolute?
Posted by Dolores Bruner on July 6, 2012
A few months ago I heard on the news that Starbucks Corp. was donating to the effort to redefine marriage. I began a personal boycott of Starbucks and have encouraged others to do so as well. There are lots of other coffee shops to try out.
Posted by David Simonton on July 5, 2012
Right, peer pressure. That's why people disagree with you. They couldn't possibly be exercising reason in good faith. They must have been tricked or pressured into believing and acting differently than you do.
Posted by Debbie Ewald on July 3, 2012
Well said. It seems the left has robbed our society of the ability to really think things through & instead blindly follow what seems right in their own eyes.
Posted by Roland Burdge on July 3, 2012
I Alway have liked Bill Gates.He and his wife have done alot of good things with there money to help people. I dont know to much about Balmer, He stays in the background not wanting to be noticed. But even at that and my feelings about them,they need to redefine there thinking on this subject.It just needs to be struck down. It doesn't make sense to a whole lot of people in the U.S.
Posted by Nancy Kasper on July 3, 2012
Your arguments are sound, Joseph, and it is commendable that you are speaking out against the elite who feel that their views ought to be what everyone follows because they have "evolved" above the little guys. Narcissists are, in their minds, always important, always right, and always ready to throw their weight around. The vast majority of the ultra-rich and Hollywood celebrities fit this profile. They will never, ever admit that another point of view might have merit or actually be superior to their own. It is all about denial and spiritual blindness. Keep up the commentary! Well done!!!
Posted by Linda Dybwad on July 3, 2012
Thank you for this reaction to the new supporters of redefined marriage. This issue as well as others continues to lead us down the amoral path. The more often we say there is no right and wrong (not people but behavior) the easier it is for everyone to do whatever they want regardless of consequences. I have actually heard someone say, "this is a democracy, we can do whatever we want!" Perhaps civics needs a comeback in our schools, we know teaching right and wrong needs a comeback in our homes, and people with real family values need to speak up, model, and teach it is rules and guidelines from God that gave us our democracy and that includes me and my household.
Posted by Kari R on July 3, 2012
It is good to have the data to support marriage as being between one man and one woman, but is it wrong to suggest that some things are immoral because God said they were, regardless of ones sense of fairness or anothers for religiosity.
Posted by Tom Peterson on July 3, 2012
We need to hear more data from the FPI on marriage that we heard at Sundquist's house last week....It was shocking to hear that the data is in and single parent households, divorce and other problems that interrupt God's plan for marriage are filling our prisons, welfare and other social service rolls.
Post a comment:
enter code:
reload image