Beyond Same-Gender Marriage

Reed Benson

Many people assume that the tension over the issue of same-gender marriage would dissipate if the homosexuals were granted what they wished. That is why many whose inclinations run contrary to such an idea simply shrug apathetically, ready to acquiesce. Eager to return their attention to other matters, they are happy to assume that the homosexuals will be satisfied when they are allowed to marry and everyone can get on with life, quietly minding their own business.

Will the homosexuals be satisfied when same-gender marriage is legalized? Can we expect mutual respect and tranquility? Or are there indicators that suggest that tension will remain? Before we go further, a quick look at the Bible will reveal useful insights regarding the nature of homosexuals.

Genesis 19 is dedicated to the story of Lotís escape from the city of Sodom. Although the wickedness of the city had become "very grievous" (Gen 18:20) God was prepared suspend judgment for the sake of ten righteous souls. As it turned out, not even ten could be found. For the sake of Abraham, Jehovah sent two angels to fetch his nephew Lot. When the angels entered the city, Lot urged them to spend the night in his home for their own safety, not perceiving they were angelic but knowing full well what sort of nocturnal shenanigans often occurred in Sodom. But before anyone retired to sleep, Lotís house was "compassed" from "every quarter" of the city by men calling out, "Where are the men which came in to thee this night? Bring them out unto us that we may know them" (Genesis 19:4-5).

Please note the aggressiveness of this crowd! And please understand that when they demanded to "know" the strangers, they were seeking sexual intimacy. Undeterred by Lotís initial protests, the mob intensified its cries. They spurned Lotís offer to turn his daughters over to them (What was he thinking?!?). No, they were after the handsome men under Lotís roof, not young ladies. The immediate danger subsided when the angels struck the crowd of homosexuals with blindness, and insisted that Lot prepare to escape from the city that very night.

Now the major thrust of this short journey into Scripture is to realize that homosexuals are, by the nature of their sinful habits, not polite. They are not people that try to foster mutual respect for other folks nor are they inclined to display a "live and let live" attitude. No, as a group they are abrasive, rude, selfish, cruel, and vindictive. Individual exceptions can be found no doubt, but the group psychology is one of aggressively seeking to foist their lifestyle into the face of those who disagree. That is why Paul, in his epistle to the congregation at Rome, said these men who "burned in their lust one toward another," are filled with, "covetousness, maliciousness, envy, murder, debate, deceit, and malignity," and characterized them as, "whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, inventors of evil things," and stated they are "without natural affection" (Romans 1:27-31).

So, have homosexuals changed since the epoch of Abraham or the days of Paul? Or are their inclinations the same? Despite what many foolish liberals would like you to believe, they have not changed. Their demands never end, their lusts are never slaked, and their debaucheries are ever more depraved. Same-gender marriage is not the end of their demands, but rather a signpost on their never-ending journey toward moral degeneracy.

If they achieve their present goal of same-gender marriage, where will they go next? Is there any way of knowing? Indeed there is. They have told us.

First, they are determined to abolish all age of consent laws to provide "sexual liberation for children." The 1972 Gay Rights Platform has this published goal: "Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent." David Thorstad, a founder of North American Man Boy Love Association stated: "Pederasty [sodomy between a man and a boy] is the main form that male homosexuality has acquired throughout Western civilizationóand not only in the West! Pederasty is inseparable from the high points of Western cultureóancient Greece and the Renaissance." Richard Mohr, another prominent homosexual activist has argued that "gay youth" is the fountainhead of political and cultural victories. He stated, " . . .these brave youth are key to cultureís change on gay issues . . . Thanks to them the gay movement is achieving critical mass." Author and critic of the homosexual movement Mary Eberstadt has observed, "as the homosexual movement becomes more mainstream this question about adult/child sex will become more prominent."

Second, the homosexual movement is eager to introduce a number of alternatives to traditional marriage, including polygamy (one male with two or more females), polyandry (one female with two or more males), and polyamory (multiple males and females). Indeed, the Polyamory Association has a sophisticated website, several publications, and thousands of supporters. Respecting the alternatives to traditional marriage the homosexual movement is seeking, their statement, "Beyond Gay Marriage," was recently released as a full-page ad in the New York Times. Their mission is to "offer a new vision for securing governmental and private institutional recognition of diverse kinds of partnerships, households, kinship relationships, and families," including, "committed loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner." In The Weekly Standard, Ryan T. Anderson, has accurately forecast where this will lead our society: "The result of meeting these demands will be a culture, a legal system, and a government that considers a monogamous, exclusive, permanent sexual relationship of child-bearing and child-rearing nothing more than one among many lifestyle choices . . . marriage as a social institution would be destroyed."

Third, they are insistent in their demand to produce and rear children in these environments. Again, from "Beyond Gay Marriage," they demand legal recognition for "queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households." Notice please, no reference is made to the childís interests or welfare. Rearing of children in such bizarre environments is dangerous enough, but create? While we of a traditional biblical mindset would like to assume that to be impossible, it may not be much longer. Cloning has introduced the technology that makes it feasible for a female to produce, without male sperm, a "clone," i.e. an identical twin to oneself, only much younger. An egg is harvested from an adult female, the incomplete genetic material is removed from the center, complete genetic material from the adult female taken from mature cells elsewhere in her body is inserted into the hollow egg, and the egg, now "fertilized" is implanted in the uterus of the same adult female where it will grow into a child. The notion of a society of lesbians that have absolutely no dependence on males, even for reproduction, is less ridiculous than it may at first appear.

Does the homosexual movement in the United States have the political muscle to impose their agenda on the rest of the populace? Maybe. President Barak Obama has promised to institute many items on their agenda. What will he attempt?

First, Obama will press for the passage of hate crime laws and a "fully inclusive" Employment Non-Discrimination Act, which would outlaw discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. This would give same-gender couples all of the same rights in adoption and family law. "As your President, I will use the bully pulpit to urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws," Obama said.

Second, he has pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Why is this significant? The Full Faith and Credit Clause of the United States Constitution, found in Article 4 section 1, requires all states to recognize as valid any and every marriage contracted in another state. Thus, if one state, say Massachusetts, legalizes same-gender marriage, all other states are required to recognize such a union as lawful and valid in their own state. The only constitutionally lawful way for traditional minded states to avoid such an unpleasant dilemma is if a federal law specifically exempts such marriages from the Full Faith and Credit Clause. Fortunately, in 1996, Congress passed such a federal law, the Defense of Marriage Act. The great majority of states have been under that protection since that time and same-gender marriage has been essentially stopped in its tracks. Unfortunately, Obama has stated his desire to repeal this federal law. Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, both flaming liberal Democrats, are in full agreement. With a strong Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress, repeal of DOMA appears likely. At that moment, the floodgates of same-gender marriage will sweep across the nation. It will not matter if a conservative state has passed its own state law banning same-gender marriage; without the DOMA exemption from the Full Faith and Credit Clause, such state laws are unconstitutional, and will not stand. Homosexuals will be free to marry in Massachusetts, move to a conservative state like Oklahoma, demand every right that a traditional marriage possesses, and get them. Objectors to such outrages will have no legal recourse.

Third, Obama has promised to repeal the "Donít Ask, Donít Tell" policy that excludes openly practicing homosexuals from military service. The fact that this will seriously erode morale and combat effectiveness is of little concern to Obama, who shares his leftist comradesí disdain for the American military services.

Traditionally minded conservatives would be foolish to underestimate the determination of the homosexual movement respecting same-gender marriage and all that may follow. California illustrates their ability to use the law when convenient and trample the law when it impedes their agenda. Several years ago, California passed a statewide referendum that established a statute declaring that marriage would only be lawful if it was between a man and a woman. This law was overturned by the notoriously liberal ninth circuit court, which declared that such a statute was contrary to the state constitution. Many will remember how the homosexuals celebrated and contracted many marriages in San Francisco when that ruling came forth! Since then, however, the conservative forces rallied and placed Proposition 8 on the ballot, which was a state constitutional amendment that forbade homosexual marriage. In November 2008 it passed. Hooray! This trumped any liberal court that wanted to argue that any such law was unconstitutional. But sadly, the forces of immorality have thus far refused to yield, and are busy filing law suits to invalidate Proposition 8. Despite the fact that California voters have now declared two times that same-gender marriage is unwanted, the issue remains unresolved.

It is imperative that biblically minded folks who love God and His righteous commandments perceive what kind of an enemy we face. The homosexuals are, as St. Paul said, filled with "debate, deceit," and "malignity" (Romans 1:29). As "haters of God," and "inventors of evil things," (Romans 1:30) they will never, as a group, concede that their "vile affections" (Romans 1:26) are harmful to themselves or society. Although individual homosexuals can and occasionally do repent, we must not expect the movement as whole to do anything except press deeper into moral depravity. Stiffen your resolve for a long, hard struggle.

 

Rediscovering Western

Christian Civilization