Anti-Proposition 8 Arguments Based on Feelings, Not Facts
by Scott Perry
| 2013/03/03 |
I recently read an article by Meg Whitman, CEO of Hewlett-Packard, in which she outlines her reasons for joining “a prominent group of conservatives, moderate Republicans and social libertarians” in signing onto an amicus brief in Hollingsworth v. Perry, a Supreme Court case challenging California’s Proposition 8. In citing her reasons for opposing Prop. 8, Ms. Whitman states in her article that, “I feel the time has come to bestow marriage equality to same-sex couples,” arguing that there is “no legitimate, fact-based reason for providing different legal treatment of committed relationships between same-sex couples.” I respectfully disagree.
Blurbs from the Bossman ::
In the interest of full disclosure, this writer is a Bible-believing disciple of Jesus Christ; therefore, my thoughts and opinions on this subject are firmly rooted in the tenets of His teachings. Furthermore, I am a true libertarian where this issue is concerned. However, I am against being compelled by militant homosexual activists to “tolerate” and agree with their lifestyle. Trust me when I say that I REALLY do not care what anyone does in the privacy of his/her bedroom. When someone insists, however, that it’s none of my business while flouting their sexual proclivities in my face, telling me that I MUST accept their lifestyle as "normal" or "natural", that’s where they lose me.
I also feel it necessary to point out here that nowhere in the Bible does it state that God "hates" or singles out homosexuals. His Word, as expressed in the Holy Bible, states that ALL sex outside of marriage, (hetero AND homo), is a sin. “Give honor to marriage, and remain faithful to one another in marriage. God will surely judge people who are immoral and those who commit adultery,” Hebrews 13:4 (NLT). It also espouses the principle that God hates the sin, “For everyone has sinned; we all fall short of God's glorious standard,” Romans 3:23 (NLT), but loves the sinner, “But God showed his great love for us by sending Christ to die for us while we were still sinners,” Romans 5:8 (NLT). Thus, “gay bashing” is DEFINITELY not in accordance with Christian teaching, either, despite the stories you see in the news about that handful of knuckleheads from the Westboro Baptist Church, who go around spewing that “God hates fags” nonsense. To be clear, bigotry and hatred are not my motivations here.
Marriage is a civil and social contract, to be sure, but it’s much more than just a “corporate merger” between two persons. Traditional marriage is not simply a creature of statute. Rather, it is based on the Scriptural principle of a holy union between man and woman, ordained by God, geared not only toward procreation, but the unity and well-being of both the husband and wife. We see this principle manifest throughout history. It has been codified into our system of laws. In the eyes of the law, a married couple is considered one person, which is an extension of the Biblical principle of “two becoming one flesh.” Our body of laws regarding tenancy by the entireties, spousal immunity, (which prevents the state from compelling one spouse to testify against the other), and community property are but a few examples of this.
Marriage also imposes certain duties and obligations upon both a husband and his wife. Throughout Scripture, a wife is regarded as highly valuable, thus worthy of great care and respect, “The man who finds a wife finds a treasure, and he receives favor from the LORD,” Proverbs 18:22 (NLT); Who can find a virtuous and capable wife? She is more precious than rubies,” Proverbs 31:10 (NLT). This is why God even sets forth a commandment to men in this regard: “For husbands, this means love your wives, just as Christ loved the church. He gave up His life for her,” Ephesians 5:25 (NLT). In addition, the Bible clearly sets forth the duties of husbands and wives toward one another in Ephesians Chapter 5. This is not to say that all marriages are perfect unions, by any means. As fallible human beings, we are prone to defect and failure, but this does not alter the principle of the ideal.
My main argument against so-called ‘homosexual marriage’ is based not only on the Bible, but also on science and biology. The physiological and psychological (as well as spiritual) differences between males and females are self-evident and are well-documented. Same-sex unions, by their very nature, are sterile unions whose primary purpose is to gratify of the desires of two persons, rather than to benefit society as a whole. They deny the innate differences between the sexes, not to mention the primary purpose of marriage: propagation of the human race. “This explains why a man leaves his father and mother and is joined with his wife; and the two are united into one,” Genesis 2:24 (NLT). The King James version calls this “two becoming one flesh.” In addition to the Scriptural argument, the biology is all wrong, therein is my problem with so-called "gay marriage". Biologically speaking, it is impossible for two persons of the same sex to “become one flesh”. The institution of marriage was founded out of biological necessity and if the word “marriage” is redefined to mean anything, it will eventually mean nothing. Allow me to explain.
Even traditional marriage between two opposite-sex persons imposes certain legal limitations upon its participants. Persons of the opposite sex, for example, cannot legally marry if they are related to one another, (i.e., brother and sister, father and daughter, etc.), not to mention laws against polygamy. Now, let's just say that in a state which recognizes homosexual unions, for example, Connecticut, that two brothers wish to be "married". What's to stop them from challenging laws prohibiting blood relatives from marrying? Already, the ACLU is using precedents set by the decisions regarding same-sex unions to argue for the legalization of polygamy. Simply put, every time society crosses one line, the activists move the goal post. If the state must grant equal status to same-sex couples based simply upon the fact that they love one another, on what logical basis can it prohibit such things as incest, bestiality or pedophilia?
I also reject the argument that traditional marriage somehow "deprives" homosexuals of their civil rights. There are already a number of ways that same-sex couples can secure and preserve their legal rights as couples; many companies now even offer the same benefit packages to employees with same-sex domestic partners as they do for traditional spouses. I am by no means against homosexual persons living their lives in any way they choose. I do believe, however, that state sanctioning of same-sex unions will have far-reaching implications for society that few people have really bothered to completely think through.