About gay marriage

Well, I probably won’t say anything here that hasn’t been said before by some left-wing radical who would like to see the destruction of western civilization and everything we hold dear. Just for the record, I am not that.

Also for the record, let me say that my conclusions have not been easy ones. As a church-going, mainstream Christian I’ve struggled with the idea of same-sex marriage for most of my adult life. But I can no longer in good conscience oppose it.

The final straw was an examination of the arguments aired after the Massachusetts Supreme Court upheld same-sex marriage in that state.  And none of them — which are easily found in a Google search going back 10 years or more — make sense to me. Thank you, James Dobson, for bringing me clarity.

James Dobson. Reading from Leviticus?

Argument 1.“The implications for children in a world of decaying families are profound. A recent article in the Weekly Standard described how the advent of legally sanctioned gay unions in Scandinavian countries has already destroyed the institution of marriage, where half of today’s children are born out of wedlock.  It is predicted now, based on demographic trends in this country, that more than half of the babies born in the 1990s will spend at least part of their childhood in single-parent homes.”

Answer: A recent study found that same-sex marriage had absolutely no bearing on children born out of wedlock in  Scandinavia, where these demographics have been changing for the past 30 years.  Further, half of all AMERICAN children will spend at least some of their lives in single-parent homes, even though gay marriage here is an anomaly. Finally, where is Dobson’s evidence that gay unions destroy families? They haven’t destroyed mine or any I know. In many cases, adopted children who had no families find them in same-sex homes.

Argument 2. “The introduction of legalized gay marriages will lead inexorably to polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions.”

The result of gay marriage

Answer: It hasn’t happened in Scandinavia, the example Dobson likes to use. Why does he think it will happen here?

Argument 3. “An even greater objective of the homosexual movement is to end the state’s compelling interest in marital relationships altogether. After marriages have been redefined, divorces will be obtained instantly, will not involve a court, and will take on the status of a driver’s license or a hunting permit.”

Answer: Dobson doesn’t explain how he makes the leap from gay marriage to instant divorces. And it’s odd that he would be concerned about the “state’s compelling interest in marital relationships,” since he views marriage as a sacred relationship ordained by God. He really can’t have it both ways.

Argument 4: “With the legalization of homosexual marriage, every public school in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.”

Answer: I wasn’t aware that public schools were required to teach anything about marriage. At least my kids didn’t have any classes about it.

Maladjusted children in a gay household

Argument 5: “From that point forward, courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad. The prospect of fatherless and motherless children will not be considered in the evaluation of eligibility. It will be the law.”

Answer: While this is pure speculation, I agree with Dobson on one point:  Ideally, children should have both male and female role models in the home. But loving, responsible same-sex parents are a vast improvement over life in a dysfunctional (or abusive) heterosexual home or in an orphanage. In fact, the evidence is mounting that children raised in same-sex households do just fine.

Argument 6: “Foster-care parents will be required to undergo ‘sensitivity training’ to rid themselves of bias in favor of traditional marriage, and will have to affirm homosexuality in children and teens.”

Answer: I’m not sure why Dobson thinks foster parents will be required to do this. But foster parents should be required to treat foster children as if they were their own. Dr. Dobson should talk to parents of gay children and teenagers and ask them one question: What works out better in the long run – accepting your kids for who they are, or kicking them out on the street?

Argument 7: “How about the impact on Social Security if there are millions of new dependents that will be entitled to survivor benefits? It will amount to billions of dollars on an already overburdened system. “

Answer:  Dobson’s problem isn’t with the impact on Social Security. His problem is that the dependents in this case would be gay. It’s doubtful he’d fret about stress on the system if every gay couple “turned straight” and married a partner of the opposite sex.

Argument 8: “Marriage among homosexuals will spread throughout the world, just as pornography did after the Nixon Commission declared obscene material ‘beneficial’ to mankind. Almost instantly, the English-speaking countries liberalized their laws against smut. America continues to be the fountainhead of filth and immorality, and its influence is global.”

Responsible for porn around the world

Answer: The assumption here is that homosexual marriage is filthy and that the rest of the world is licking its chops for permission to follow the American “fountainhead of filth and immorality.” But I thought Scandinavia was the leader here? Isn’t that what he said?

Argument 9: “Perhaps most important, the spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ will be severely curtailed. The family has been God’s primary vehicle for evangelism since the beginning. Its most important assignment has been the propagation of the human race and the handing down of the faith to our children. . . Are we now going to join the Netherlands and Belgium to become the third country in the history of the world to ‘normalize’ and legalize behavior that has been prohibited by God himself? Heaven help us if we do!”

Answer: I challenge Dobson to find one word in the Gospel of Jesus Christ  about homosexuality. Jesus never preached about it, and neither did Paul. That said, it’s important to acknowledge religious opposition to gay marriage, and if Dobson limited himself to this argument I could respect his opinion. But he seems to be saying that the states should make laws based on religious doctrine. Heaven help us if they do! As long as states that allow same-sex unions don’t impose that requirement on churches (which none of them have) Dobson’s religion is safe. And while there may be no gay people of faith in his church, I assure him they exist – in mine and in almost every church around the world.

Argument 10: “The culture war will be over, and I fear, the world may soon become ‘as it was in the days of Noah’ (Matthew 24:37, NIV). This is the climactic moment in the battle to preserve the family, and future generations hang in the balance. This apocalyptic and pessimistic view of the institution of the family and its future will sound alarmist to many, but I think it will prove accurate unless God’s people awaken and begin an even greater vigil of prayer for our nation.”

Answer: I’ve been married for nearly 30 years, and no Jack and Jim or Kay and Karen setting up housekeeping down the street could ever shake what we’ve built. Gay marriage isn’t the end of the family. It’s the beginning of some.

It also isn’t the end of western civilization. It’s just the end of things as many people would like them to be.