Why I Do Not Support Homosexual Marriage
This is part of an email that I sent to a non-Christian friend explaining why I do not support same-sex marriage. Most of the ideas are taken from the webpages that I've linked to below. Please send me any comments or questions. -Caleb
I'm a Christian and you're not so we're probably not going to agree on a lot of things. But what you don't know is that I don't just think that homosexual marriage is wrong because of my religious convictions but also because of what homosexual marriage has done sociologically.
You probably know that same-sex marriage has been legal in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden for the last ten years. But instead of encouraging more people to get married, their laws have driven home the point that marriage itself is outdated. Heterosexual marriage actually decreased and out of wedlock pregnancies dramatically increased. In Scandinavia, most couples married before the birth of their second child (the first child shocked most couples in the realization that it would be better for their family if they got married). But since same-sex marriage was legalized, 80% of first born children are born out of wedlock and 60% of all subsequent children are born to unwed parents. Acceptance of homosexual marriages does hurt heterosexual marriage.
The fact is that homosexual relationships are not the same as heterosexual relationships. First of all, homosexuals are much, much more promiscuous than heterosexuals. Everyone who has researched that agrees. What makes you think that gay men will all of a sudden will choose one guy to settle down with for the rest of his life if he chooses to be promiscuous when he could have always have chosen to be monogamous? In a study by the Journal of Sex Research of 2,583 homosexuals, only 2.7% claimed to have had sex with only one partner.1 Other studies have shown that homosexual relationships rarely last more than two years2 while others have shown that homosexual men literally have hundreds of partners. According to AP Bell and MS Weinberg, 24% of gay men had over 100 partners, 43% of gay men had over 500 partners, and 28% had over 1000 partners. In fact a few openly gay researchers have concluded that sexual relationships between men rarely survive if they are not open to outside sexual contacts.4 Now what would make all of these men suddenly give up their freedom for monogamy? Tax breaks and health care coverage certainly wouldn't do it. Anyone who says otherwise doesn't understand men and their desire to be free and independent. If anything most would have an 'open marriage' where they get legal benefits but can sleep around if they want. But that isn't really a marriage and I don't see why we should call it a marriage.
We can't define marriage as anything other than what it has always been. If you want to legalize homosexual marriage because two people love each other, why should we stop there? I've never asked you before, are you in favor of bigamy? There are already lawsuits promoting bigamy, which use the same equal rights laws that are being used to challenge the traditional definition of marriage. If same-sex marriage is legalized, then there is absolutely no reason why bigamy shouldn't be legalized either. Why couldn't a child have two mommies and a daddy instead of one mommy and one daddy? What about two daddies and two mommies? Or one mommy and three daddies? If one wanted to get divorced, could the other two stay married? A family could be any number and combination of people who could get married or divorced at will. It would make a mockery of marriage. It would be more like a club (or very similar to what we see on television right now just with a new label). Ironically, the health insurance companies would have to make new rules about coverage completely separate from marriage. And why stop at number, couldn't a man who enjoyed bestiality marry his pet dog if they 'truly loved each other'? Who is high enough above them that they can be an impartial judge? Age restrictions too may be just another archaic rule from a bygone era when people didn't know how to have fun. Why do we have age restrictions? It is because we know that some things are harmful, like getting married when you're eleven (or four). Homosexual marriage would start us down a very slippery slope.
Let me ask you a question: Why does the government control marriage in the first place? Or in other words, what is the purpose of marriage? It's certainly not to keep people faithful to each other. No one who has looked at recent divorce statistics could honestly claim that marriage keeps people faithful (especially if they are promiscuous before marriage). Is it because they love each other and want to have sex? No, otherwise we'd have laws about adultery and pre-marital sex. Here's a hint: the government exists for the betterment of its people. The real reason is that the government controls marriage is that marriage is good for children and consequently for the people as a whole. Recently, the American College of Pediatricians published a position entitled, "Homosexual Parenting: Is It Time For a Change?" which says, "...the environment in which children are reared is absolutely critical to their development. Given the current body of research, the American College of Pediatricians believes it is inappropriate, potentially hazardous to children, and dangerously irresponsible to change the age-old prohibition on homosexual parenting..." Their entire article is online at http://www.acpeds.org/?CONTEXT=art&cat=22&art=50&BISKIT=4233170734 and it talks about how violence is two to three times more common among homosexual relationships than heterosexual relationships and that homosexuals are more likely than heterosexuals to experience mental illness, substance abuse, suicidal tendencies, and shortened life spans- none of which are prime environments for raising a child. Another study shows that this isn't restricted only to the United States but is also a common problem in cultures where homosexuality is socially acceptable. Homosexual marriages would not be a good environment for children.
So without even breaching the subject of religion, I can give you four good reasons why homosexual marriage should not be legalized: acceptance of homosexual marriage does hurt heterosexual marriage; homosexual relationships are very different than heterosexual relationships; homosexual marriage will lead to many other definitions of 'marriage'; and homosexual marriage is not good for children.
Finally, I believe that homosexual relationships are wrong because the Bible says they are wrong. When people say that there are no moral truths, they first assume that God doesn't exist. But if He does exist, then it only makes sense that moral absolutes exist and that He would understand them better than we do. Have you ever stopped to consider why we have rules at all? I finally figured out that we have rules for our own good. It's not just for the good of society, but for our own individual good. So if God loves us, then He would give us rules so that we would know what not to do so we wouldn't hurt ourselves. Homosexual lifestyles are one of the things that God says are wrong because they hurt us. God created us to be in one male to one female relationships. Whenever we change God's design, we are perverting the good thing that He has made and rebelling by saying, "We know better than you." Practicing homosexuality on an individual level has bad enough consequences, but institutionalizing it is just asking for trouble. The way that God brings people back to Himself is by letting them experience the natural consequences of their rebellion. Since God's ultimate goal on earth is to be glorified by reconciling us to Himself, He will allow us a lot of suffering if that's what it takes to get it through our thick heads to return to Him. I'd rather not have everyone suffer, which is ultimately why I do not support homosexual marriage. Less rebellion now means less suffering later.
1. Paul Van de Ven et al., “A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men,” Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): p. 354. Dr. Paul Van de Ven reiterated these results in a private conversation with Dr. Robert Gagnon on September 7, 2000
2. M. Pollak, “Male Homosexuality, Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times”, ed. P. Aries and A. Bejin, translated by Anthony Forster, New York, NY: B. Blackwell, 1985, pp. 40–61.
3. Survey Finds 40 percent of Gay Men Have Had More Than 40 Sex Partners," Lambda Report, January/February 1998, p. 20. A. P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), pp. 308, 9; see also Bell, Weinberg and Hammersmith, Sexual Preference (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981).
4. McWhirter, D. and Mattison, A., The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop, Prentice-Hall, 1984
http://www.family.org/cforum/fosi/homosexuality/maf/a0028248.cfm
http://www.formarriage.org/faq.html
http://www.allianceformarriage.org/
http://www.boundless.org
Post a Comment