Christian Worldview Concepts

A Case Against Gay Marriage

Homosexual Marriage is Not a Civil Rights Issue

Proponents of homosexual marriage argue that denying homosexuals the right to marry is a violation of their civil rights. They claim that just as it was wrong to prohibit blacks and whites from marrying, it is also wrong to bar homosexuals access to the rights and benefits of civil marriage.

For many years, state laws prevented interracial marriage, but the U. S. Supreme Court found these laws unconstitutional and in violation of the equal protection provisions of the Constitution.

Gay activists make a similar argument for gay marriage, claiming that they are being discriminated against for being what nature made them. They cannot help being homosexual any more than a black can help being black. In short, homosexuals claim that sodomy is a natural occurring act that should be protected by law in a manner similar to the legal protections afforded race.

However, skin color and sexual behavior are entirely different. The first is an inborn characteristic while the second is behaviorally based and has everything to do with individual character, moral choices and society's basic rules of conduct. If civil rights laws can be used to justify the behaviors of homosexuals, there is virtually no place to stop. New laws would need to be passed on a daily basis to accommodate the claims of smokers, gamblers, pornography addicts, etc.

Activists react strongly to the contention that homosexuality is contrary to nature. Yet, the scientific evidence is stacked against them. No reputable scientific research supports the claim that homosexuality is a naturally occurring condition. The medical literature is devoid of peer-reviewed research supporting the claim that homosexuality is biological.

Some gay rights activists acknowledge that homosexuality is not natural, but intend to press for legalization of same sex marriage anyway. Organizations such as Better Humans contend that we should not let what is "natural" define our social values. Instead, they contend that we should deploy reason over nature, refusing to submit to what is natural. As one activist put it, "Just because heterosexual marriage has been the only form of marriage recognized for the last two thousand years is no reason to not change it." Some who subscribe to Transhumanism , which is a permutation of Humanism, claim that we must reject the so called natural order to improve humanity. We should do what is "reasonable," not what is natural.

However, this refusal to accept the norms of nature notwithstanding, there are certain facts of life that must be recognized. Social features are open to change. Inherent, natural ones are not. Marriage, like many important social institutions, is a combination of natural reality (the biology of procreation) and social construct (the culture that nurtures and supports procreation). Transhumanists may truly believe that medical technology may one day remove the obstacles to same sex procreation (and it may), but this technological Tower of Babel will not eradicate other significant gender-specific features of heterosexual procreation and marriage.