Same Sex Marriage
In the late twentieth century, secularists jumped on the civil rights train and in so doing derailed the long fought Western tradition. The debate over same-sex marriage has been labeled by social progressives as the civil rights movement of the twenty-first century while making every attempt to ride on the coattails of the black civil rights movement of the 1960s. Aided by the Democratic Party and progressive judges, gay activists have imposed same-sex marriage, gay hate-crime legislation, as well as a gay education agenda with much success. Because they know they can’t win this battle at the ballot box, seeing they lost every attempt, even in California, they have discarded our democratic process by appealing to liberal judges, who did the bidding for them.
The false premise that undergirds their ideology is the claim that sexual orientation is genetic and therefore involuntary. Let me start by saying that if that were true, it would not automatically end the argument and render homosexual behavior appropriate, because we know there are a host of socially unacceptable behaviors that can be linked to one’s genetic makeup, such as alcoholism and violence. Because many gay men and women claim that their attraction to the same gender started at an early age, the consensus among gay activists is that they were born gay. But that only supports what social scientists have affirmed—that homosexuality is something that starts at an early age when a child is processing information identifying with a particular gender. The National Association for Research and Therapy for Homosexuality (NARTH) has compiled the body of evidence refuting the claim that homosexuality is a genetic condition; we will look at just one of those studies.
Researchers J. Michael Bailey and Richard C. Pillar set out to study homosexual behavior among identical twins separated at birth. Remember an identical twin is one that comes from the same fertilized egg and therefore possesses the identical genetic composition. A close look at these twins would find that they have the identical hair and eye color, identical teeth and nail structure, and so forth. For the “gay gene” argument to hold, 100 percent of the gay twin siblings would have to be gay as well. The study found that only 52 percent of the time, both identical twins were homosexual, while other studies found the number to be even lower. Of course this position also ignores organizations like Exodus International, which reports on the tens of thousands of former gays who have since rejected such a lifestyle.
Now let’s talk about the civil rights component by addressing the issue of same-sex marriage. But first let’s cut the cord that has attempted to associate the gay movement with that of the black civil rights struggle, pairing Rosie O’ Donnell with Rosa Parks. Prior to the 1960s, African Americans were denied entrance to our educational establishment along with access to our court system, job market, political process, and public facilities simply because of the color of their skin. They were the object of public scorn, ridicule, and violence all with the consent of our legal system. Homosexuals face no such discrimination or economic inequality; in fact studies have found that under similar situations they earn more per household than their straight counterparts, making such a comparison insulting at best. The biggest problem with their argument is the fact that a black man can never change his skin color. On the other hand, gay men and women can and have changed, making it an issue of behavior and choice.
Gay marriage is not a civil rights issue at all for the simple fact that any gay person in America can get married; they just have to marry someone of the opposite sex. In this particular case, the law applies to everyone equally. In fact, today there are many restrictions on marriage such as polygamy laws, age laws, and laws restricting marriage to relatives. Once again they apply equally to everyone. The debate, properly understood, is the redefinition of a four-thousand-year-old institution, not a civil rights issue, and therefore should be left to the voters rather than the courts.
Same sex marriage and traditional marriage
Family advocates argue that same-sex marriage will further erode the bonds of traditional marriage, while secularists reject such an argument, citing a 12 percent reduction in divorce among Scandinavian countries which legalized gay marriage in the mid-1990s. What we know is that between 1990 and 2000, Norway’s out-of-wedlock birth rate increased from 39 percent to 50 percent; in Sweden it rose from 47 percent to 55 percent; and in Denmark it rose from 46 percent to 60 percent. With fewer people getting married, it’s only logical that the decline in divorce would follow. What’s happening is what social conservatives have long suspected, that marriage itself is in deep decline as a result of gay marriage.
The decline in marriage can be explained by the diminishing link between marriage and children. That is to say, from a social perspective marriage is primarily about raising children, not love. The reason governments got involved in marriage is because of the strong social benefits of providing a stable environment for the next generation. The government should not be in the love and lust business, but it can provide incentives for good social behavior. Gay marriage further erodes the link between marriage and children, making marriage more about the feelings of the adults, than the needs of the children. When marriage is so drastically redefined as a relationship for the happiness of the adults, the children suffer and marriage as an institution declines.
Same sex marriage and adoption
It must be understood that with same sex marriage, by extension gay adoption will follow. In his article “Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement,” Steve Baldwin summarizes the academic research where he notes that homosexuals, who account for only 3 percent of the population, also account for 40 percent of child molestation cases. And seeing that most child molestations happen by stepfathers and family members, open gay adoption will inevitably put children in the most dangerous possible environment.
At the end of the day I couldn’t care less what people do in the privacy of their homes, but that doesn’t mean I have to consent to it. The problem I have with this self-righteous liberal sad story is the way they are shoving their radical agenda down the throats of a reluctant American public. They’ve succeeded in imposing gay education on children of unwilling parents by bypassing our democratic process and by portraying gay behavior as mainstream, ignoring the reality that homosexuals suffer from a higher rate of depression, drug use, promiscuity, pedophilia, and domestic violence.
On an individual level the issues are very complex. Author Mike Haley does an outstanding job of sorting through them in 101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality. As conservatives we must resist the liberals’ effort to stereotype us as bigots because we may not agree with their lifestyle, and hold instead to the longstanding Christian tradition “love the sinner, hate the sin.”
Homosexuality: Questions and Answers Sue Bohlin
Identical Twin Studies Prove Homosexuality is Not Genetic Mark Ellis
Confronting Cries of Bigotry Aaron Zubia
A Christian Perspective on Homosexuality William Lane Craig
Homosexuality, Marriage, Family, and the Truth: What Would Love Really Do? Jennifer Hartline
Homosexuality Is a Danger to Human Health Bryan Fischer
Kids of gay parents fare worse, study finds, but research draws fire from experts Ryan Jaslow