Same-Sex Marriage; What’s Next?

The Supreme Court of the United Sates recently heard arguments in favor of same-sex marriage. Whatever is decided in the SCOTUS, acceptance of same-sex marriage has mostly won the day in the court of public opinion. I do not believe that the arguments for gay and lesbian marriage are biblical or logically persuasive or good for society in the long run. But they made their case and here’s how it was won. The reasons for homosexual marriage flowed with the contemporary mood.

It’s about progress: homosexual marriage is an idea whose time has come we are told. To be against gay marriage then is to be against progress and who wants to be in that camp? It makes you a barbarian! But many people forget that lots of ideas first seen as progressive, right and hailed as good and inevitable wound up on the junk heap: feudalism, National Socialism, communism, slavery, eugenics and the Chevy Volt.

It’s about love: when homosexual marriage is showcased as an expression of deep human love, who wants to be against love? But deep human love is not always self-affirming; sometimes it needs to be about self-denial. Sadly, mostly because of the failures and sins of those in failed heterosexual marriages our culture only sees marriage as the state putting its stamp of approval on romantic love. Marriage is seen as a relationship based on emotional intensity in which the couple is faithful to each other as long as the intensity lasts. The sacrifices that may be needed to maintain a marriage and bear and raise children are rarely thought about.

Male homosexuals are notorious for their promiscuity. Exclusivity is not their strength. So what happens to the children (from surrogate mothers – another can of worms) when marriages fail? Love is an important part of marriage, but not a basis for public policy. What if more than two people “love” one another (I’ll get to this in a moment)?

It’s about rights and equality: it is not by chance that the movement is called the gay rights movement. And I don’t deny that many homosexuals feel their basic human rights are in jeopardy. But all the chatter about rights confuses the issue. What law prohibits homosexuals from making promises to one another? The question is should the government call that promise a marriage? Homosexuals are asking for equal justice under the law. Who doesn’t want to wave the flag for equal rights?

During oral argument at the Supreme Court, advocates argued (as they have elsewhere) that impairing the right of homosexuals to marry is analogous to prohibiting interracial marriage and the only possible motive for opposing it is, well, you know, bigotry. But society has an interest in protecting the historic definition of marriage, because it is the first institution of society that creates and nurtures the next generation. Same-sex marriages do not naturally do this. Thus the state has a right to not recognize same-sex marriage because it harms society by destabilizing it. 

Furthermore is it unjust for the government to not legalize a marriage of four people? What about a marriage of close cousins? What if all the people in the accounting office want to be married? What if I love my cat? Must the government legalize these unions if the participants feel their rights are denied? Is marriage now to be an anything goes union? That’s where this is all headed.

In their statement Beyond Same-Sex Marriage, more than 300 LGBT and allied scholars call for legally recognizing sexual relationships involving more than two partners. University of Calgary professor Elizabeth Brake states in her book Minimizing Marriage that justice requires legalizing same sex marriage to “denormalize the ideal of heterosexual monogamy.”

Lesbian journalist Victoria Brown in Something Borrowed, Something Blue: Is Marriage Right For Queers agrees. “When supporters of traditional marriage state that allowing same-sex marriage couples to marry will weaken the institution of marriage…It most certainly will do so, and that will make marriage a far better concept than it previously has been.” Professor Ellen Willis writing in The Nation boldly states “conferring the legitimacy of marriage on homosexual relations will introduce an implicit revolt against the institution into its very heart.”

Gay radio host Michelangelo Signorile in Out Magazine called for those in homosexual relationships to “demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society’s moral codes but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution.” They should “fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, because the most subversive action lesbians and gay men can undertake…is to transform the notion of ‘family’ entirely.”

So what happens if the traditional family of mom, dad and children disintegrates? Well, ask yourself, what is already happening in our society because of broken homes? Sobering isn’t it. Can anyone else see Sodom and Gomorrah in the distance? So what can be done? The energy, the media and the protest slogans are all on the side of homosexual marriage.

First, Christians must prepare their families biblically for all of life and not just for the opposition we will face concerning same-sex marriage. We must realize that we are now not only a sub-culture but counter-cultural just as Christians were in the first century of our common era. Pastors must declare what the Scriptures declare about the meaning and purpose of all of life as well as marriage. Husbands and wives must make a commitment to their marriages to keep them strong and healthy. And we need to boldly speak the truth without fear and in love. The gospel is still “the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes (Romans 1:16).”