Gay Marriage Myths
The topic of gay marriage in the United States is being hotly debated, but not logically debated. There is room for both sides to make errors in fact and judgment. In that case, either participant would reasonably be open for correction and adjustment. But when one side deliberately insists on making inane, wild and unreasonable assertions, then you know something other than logic is present. This adage has come into play:
There is no lie so blatant,
no depravity so vile,
no ignorance so inexcusable,
no argument so unreasoned
that man will not embrace
if it keeps him from admitting
that he is wrong.
The argument against gay marriage is a classic case of doctrine overcoming fact and reason. It's not even Biblical doctrine being asserted, because that is disproved in the book, Key to Biblical Doctrine by Jerald L. Brown. Sometimes the person isn't even using church doctrine. Instead, he is using his own prejudice and assumption, to the point where he is unwilling to put his ideas to the test. He simply asserts them, expecting that to prove and resolve.
I am continually amazed when otherwise rational and respected people fall into the same illogical thinking and wild accusations that they so fondly accuse other people of doing. Consider that phenomenon. Here are people you may respect and even take serious, life-changing advice from, and yet, when they approach the topic of gay marriage, they become the same blithering baboons that you would otherwise avoid at all costs. This sad condition becomes all the more dangerous because you respect them and believe them in every other important issue; so why should you not believe them now?
These people are in grave danger. They are toying with other people's lives but are immune to the consequences of their actions. But they are not immune before God! The Bible says, "My Brothers, few of you should become teachers, because God is going to judge teachers more strictly."
(James 3:1) A person who counsels others should at least be an expert on the topic of his counsels, not totally ignorant or even a novice. He will not escape the penalty of his thoughtless words.
Here, then, are some of the arguments these people make, and the the answers to those arguments.
Protection of marriage
The Argument:
If we allow gay marriage, then traditional marriage will collapse. We need to protect traditional marriage, otherwise it will become totally meaningless.
The Answer
There is only one possible way that the allowance of gay marriage would cause traditional marriage to collapse, and that is, if gay marriage was so vastly superior to traditional marriage that as soon as everyone saw how much better it was, everybody would leave traditional marriage and flock to gay marriage.
You see how ridiculous that is, and it feeds on the myth that homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle. Up to but not more than ten percent of the population is gay. Allowing gay people to get married will simply accommodate the vital needs of a few people.
You see what a lie that argument is. It is saying that in order to protect marriage, they have to forbid people to get married.
It opens the door to legitimizing any relationship
The Argument:
Of we allow gay marriage, it will justify people entering into any relationship at all: polygamy, pedophilia, bestiality, or anything else.
The Answer: about Polygamy
Polygamists do not need homosexuals to justify their demand to marry multiple spouses. Polygamy has existed from the earliest times, and they never depended on homosexuality to justify their desires. In the Bible, Jacob had two wives and two concubines, and the Bible does not condemn that; instead, God blesses it. The Mormons never used homosexuality to justify their previous practice of polygamy. If homosexuals never existed, if there were no such thing as homosexuality, the demand for polygamy would be just as strong as it always was.
One of the most common sexual fantasy heterosexual men have is to be in bed with two women at the same time. That is a heterosexual fantasy that can not be justified by homosexuality.
It is not true that a law to allow gay marriage would also have to allow polygamy. Gays are not allowed to get married at all, denying them a basic human need and human right from God; whereas, polygamy allows a person to get married several times. If a society doesn't want polygamy, they can say so, while allowing everybody to have one spouse.
The Answer: about Pedophilia
Marriage is (or should be) a binding intimate contract between two consenting adults. A child is not nor can be a consenting adult. In other countries, where women are treated as chattel and sold as wives, the word "consenting" can be removed; it is an intimate contract between two adults.
In the Bible, New Testament, Mary was espoused to Joseph (Matthew 1:18). In such a situation in those days, among those people, it was common for the girl to be very young, around fourteen years old. The man was quite a bit older, an adult maybe between thirty and fifty, and he may already have had several wives. We don't know if that was true about Mary and Joseph. We only know that such a pactice was common at that time among those people. Furthermore, we know that Mary was a "young girl," a "virgin."
The Answer: about Bestiality
Marriage is (or should be) a binding intimate contract between two consenting adults. An animal obviously cannot understand such a contract and therefore cannot consent to it. The animal could only accept being a pet.
Gays already can enter into legal relationships
The Argument:
Gays already have all the rights and contracts they need without calling the relationship a "marriage".
The Answer
If that is so, then why do you insist on preserving "marriage" for yourself? Why aren't you willing to give up marriage altogether and everyone enter into a simple binding contract? Why do you want to hold the precious right for yourself and deny others the same right?
To those of you who say you would be willing to give up "marriage" and everybody have a simple binding contract, I say, "Then why don't you campaign for and stand up for the abolution of marriage, instead of campaigning for the right of marriage for yourselves while denying it to others?
The fact is, if we're speaking only in legal terms, marriage offers a host of privileges that is unavailable to gay unions.
- Taxation. Married spouses are recognized by both the state and federal taxing systems, giving preferential treatment to married couples.
- Insurance. Married couples are given greater consideration on insurance policies and deduction.
- Adoption. Married couples are able to adopt children easier than people in gay unions
- Visitation. Married couples may easily visit a sick or dying spouse, whereas that right is frequently denied gay spouses.
- Inheritance. Gay spouses are not acknowledged as the legitimate heirs of the deceased partner. Other family members come in to the house uninvited, rummage through everything and take anything that they want to belong to their dead family members.
You may rightly say, that some or all of these are available in various states. Even if that is true, why should gay people fight for and go to great financial expense for every benefit that you are given for free? And why should it not be true in every state?
Gay Marriage will be taught in schools
The Argument:
If we allow gay marriage, it will be taught in our schools to elementary children.
The Answer
If gay marriage were legal, would you prefer your school to teach your children that it is not legal? Do you really want teachers to teach lies to your children?
Is heterosexual marriage being taught today in our schools? In what class? Arithmetic? English? In what class do you teach marriage at all?
Are Catholics, Protestants and Jews common in our society? Why aren't the Catholics afraid schools will teach their children that there are Jews and Protestants in this land?
It's just society that we're growing up in and everybody needs to adjust to it.
|