Defending Marriage
Mark Roberts
How do we defend marriage to a world that doesn’t
care about the Bible? The world says “If two men are
in love and want to get married, why shouldn’t they?
The Bible isn’t the law of our land!” One newspaper
columnist noted “Marriage used to be defined as two
people of the same race. That definition of marriage
was changed. Why shouldn’t we update our definition
of marriage to include homosexuals?”
Speaking of homosexuality as wrong used to be a
cinch. One simply marshaled any of the many passages
that condemn homosexuality as sinful and most
nearly everyone agreed such was right: homosexuality
was wrong because the Bible said so.
If Christians try that line of attack today they will
quickly discover that the Bible simply is not a factor in
many people’s decisions about how to live life. For
millions, it carries no authority whatsoever. What now?
Are Christians destined to lose the debate about homosexuality
and homosexual marriage because we
have nothing to say that people today will hear?
The answer is “no,” and the reason it is “no” is
Deuteronomy 10:13: “to keep the commandments of
the LORD and His statutes which I command you
today for your good?” The laws of God are for our
good. Anything that God has forbidden is, therefore,
not good for us nor in our best interests. God has not,
nor would He, prohibit any pleasure that is truly right for
us His creatures. Thus, if homosexuality is proscribed
in scripture, it follows that we can identify its destructive
impact in society. We can identify the tangible negatives
of homosexual marriage for people, even for
people who do not accept the Bible. The key in
discussing homosexual marriage with non-believers is
to focus their attention on how right God’s word has
always been.
For example, the first question we need to ask
proponents of homosexual marriage is “What will
this do to children?” Research consistently points
out that children raised by both mother and father have
lower rates of social problems, like premarital childbearing,
drug abuse, arrest, and poverty. Children
raised by lesbians, according to research in an American
Sociological Review article in 2001, have been
found to be less likely to conform to traditional gender
norms, are more likely to engage in homosexuality, are
more sexually adventurous and less chaste. Further,
this research found that lesbian “co-parent relationships”
are more likely to end than heterosexual ones.
Clearly kids in a homosexual “family” are at a disadvantage.
Why should society put its stamp of approval
upon a relationship that is not good for children?
This brings us to a second point that must be made:
traditional marriage is in society’s own best interests
while homosexuality has no benefit to society.
Marriage of a man and a woman has long been
recognized by people as legitimate and meaningful
because marriage serves as the basic building block
for society’s survival and continuance. Society needs
traditional marriage for many reasons, one of which is
that it provides the optimal possible environment for
raising healthy successful children. Yet of what benefit
is homosexuality? It is up to homosexuals to show that
their lifestyle and ideals are of help to all and have value
to all people. Of course, the fact that AIDS is at least
ten times more common among men who have sex
with men than among the general population is just one
example of the cost, not the benefit, of homosexuality
to society. Why should society encourage and promote
more of something like that?
Interestingly, the argument that inter-racial marriage
used to be prohibited by society actually plays into
our hands at this point. Discrimination based on race
provided no benefit to society, serving only to perpetrate
racial segregation. This was not healthy or good
for society so it was changed. Further, when a man of
one race marries a woman of another race the fundamental
nature and definition of marriage is not challenged
or changed. Homosexual marriages cannot
argue that they are good for society and they would
change marriage at its most fundamental level.
Christians should also be urge people to think
about “Where will this lead?” If it is discrimination to
keep a man from marrying a man what about the fellow
who wants to marry his dog? Can he claim discrimination
too? Don’t snicker: there are tax advantages to
“married filing jointly” (can he claim Fido as a dependent
then to?). How long till the polygamists head to
Massachusetts to get a favorable court ruling? What if
brothers want to marry brothers? What about a parent
wanting to marry a child? Again, don’t snicker. The
ACLU is not only defending the North American Man
Boy Love Association, which advocates removal of all
laws against incest, prostitution and the age of consent,
it is also working to remove laws against polygamy.
If marriage is being re-defined apart from
God’s law and the historical understanding of marriage
gained from the Bible what is out, what is in, and how
do we decide that?
Let us note clearly that the homosexual community
doesn’t just have its sights set on changing the definition
of marriage. One gay writer, Mitchell Raphael,
wrote “I’d be for marriage if I thought gay people would
challenge and change the institution and not buy into
the traditional meaning of ‘till death do us part’ and
monogamy forever.” One writer noted “The entire ‘gay
liberation’ movement has been but a part of the larger
sexual liberation movement whose fundamental tenet
is that anybody should be able to have sex with any-
body they want any time they want. To suggest that the
crowning achievement of that pro-homosexual movement
– obtaining society’s ultimate stamp of approval of
civil marriage – is suddenly going to result in these
‘liberated’ homosexuals settling down into faithful monogamous
child rearing is foolishly naive.” Only a fool
gets on a train not knowing where it is headed. If today
homosexual marriages are legitimized what will happen
tomorrow?
We should help people recognize that defending
traditional marriage can help save struggling marriages.
If people are free to leave traditional marriages
and take on new relationships with no societal stigma
that is one less barrier to people remaining where they
should be and doing what they ought to do. A man that
decides to experiment with homosexuality used to be
censured. Now he can stand on the courthouse steps
and proudly announce his sin is a “marriage” – apparently
as good as the one he destroyed to take on this
new relationship. The Boston Globe reported in June
29, 2003 that nearly 40 percent of the 5700 homosexual
couples who have entered into “civil unions” in Vermont
“have had a previous heterosexual marriage.”
Finally, Christians also ought to point out that
other failures to follow God’s word have had disastrous
results. The divorce revolution has undermined
marriage and led to broken homes and had terrible
effects on children, even when they are grown. The
sexual revolution has given us an epidemic of sexually
transmitted disease, unwanted pregnancies and abortion.
The pornography revolution has undermined sex
within marriage, resulting in broken relationships, abused
women, and sex crimes of all sorts. Changing God’s
way of doing things hasn’t worked out very well, has it?
What makes anyone think that redoing God’s definition
of marriage will be any better? This line of reasoning can
help us introduce the Word of God as having validity and
power in our world today.
The truth is that marriage is not defined by law.
Marriage pre-dates law, constitutions and courts because
it is a fundamental human relationship created by
God. He knows what is best for us and best for
marriage. Tampering with God’s definition will have
disastrous effects upon our world – both spiritually and
temporally. Let us boldly show these truths, for God’s
law is indeed “for our good always.”