Friday, March 6, 2015

Love Has No... Logic, Apparently.


The Ad Council has spoken.  Let the peoples bow at the sound of the zither and the trumpet unto the golden statue of LUVVVV.

But before we make haste to prostrate ourselves worshipfully in the dust, it might behoove us to ask ourselves- what exactly do we mean by love?

In the viral video "Love Has No Labels," we see people behind an x-ray wall showing affection to one another (kissing skeletons... yeah).  Presumably to illustrate that we are all the same on the inside... which is somewhat true, although if we're going to make that argument regarding the issue of homosexuality we must acknowledge that men and women actually aren't all the same on the inside.  There are significant anatomical and physiological differences.  (Amen somebody?!?)

Moving on; as the video progresses, the affectionate skeletons part and then appear on the outside of the wall- as real people.  Now we see who it was that was hugging, or kissing, or dancing behind the X-ray.  And here is where the logic behind this emotional plea begins to crumble.

The battle cry of the advertisement remains the same- love has no ____.

No gender- a homosexual couple.

No race- a bi-racial couple.

No age- an elderly couple, or two children hugging each other.

No disability- an autistic child playing with a friend.

No religion- "Christians," Jews, Muslims, Hindus shaking hands in ecumenical bliss.

But if we look carefully we will notice that "love" is being used in a few different ways here.

Frankly, everyone would agree with the statement at a foundational level.  Guys love guys and girls love girls all the time in a fully Biblical and healthy way- it's called friendship.  And under that definition of love- platonic friendship, or, in the words of Paul, "in all purity"- all the above statements are true (although each category and especially the category of religion must define love in such a way as not to exclude truth).

However, that is not what the advertisement is truly meaning to say; it is a plea for the acceptance of homosexuality and the elimination of distinctions, standards, and Truth.  And here is where the logic leaps the tracks, because the definition of "love" has been changed from platonic friendship to romantic and sexual passion- a love which has been designed by God and given to us as a precious, wonderful gift to be enjoyed only within the confines of covenant marriage- one-man, one-woman marriage.

Is this passionate and romantic love the love that this ad is talking about?

Well... sometimes.

To be blunt, everyone would be shocked and appalled if the six-year-old children were making out on stage.  But why?  I thought love had no age!

And this is the issue.  Love, and especially romantic love, does indeed have labels- it has categories- it has God-given definitions.  There are some "loves" that are inappropriate.  There are a thousand perversions I'd rather not name that do not deserve to be "tolerated" and are not worthy of the title "love."

So the bottom-line question is "who defines what kinds of love are OK?"  Who defines which behaviors and passions are appropriate and which are aberrant and abominable?

The Ad Council has decided that homosexual romantic love is OK, but I doubt they would feel the same about bestial romantic love, or romantic love between children, or a child and an adult, or siblings, or... the list goes on.

They are not OK with it for now, that is.  Give it time.

Scripture is clear (Lev. 18:22, Heb. 13:4).  Romantic love belongs only within the context of covenant.  Marriage.  One man, one woman, 'til death do them part.  God has spoken.

So the bottom-line question is this- will we submit to the standards of the Ad Council, or to those of The Creator of the universe?

2 comments:

Bailey said...

This is really excellent, Gabriel. The other thing with labels is that they hedge in different amounts of intimacy. Romantic love is more intimate than brotherly love, brotherly love more intimate than kindness to a stranger. Without those distinctions, there are no safe guards for the precious intimacy within those labels -- just generic "love" (which doesn't exist apart from actual relationships).

I mean, I think that's why homosexuality can never be equated with the same kind of love between a devoted married couple. Physically, emotionally...it's not the same. Draw a line there, because the two kind of intimacies are different. That's why these labels exist.

Gabriel Hudelson said...

Yes and amen. Labels = definitions; definitions = identity; identity = reality; reality = truth; truth = Jesus.

And the world hates Jesus. So the world hates labels. :-)