WHY "GAY MARRIAGE" IS WRONG

By Robert A. J. Gagnon, Ph.D. | July 2004

"Gay Marriage" as a Contradiction in Terms

Scripture, Creation, and a Two-Sexes Prerequisite

The Social-Scientific Case against "Gay Marriage"

Conclusion

Advocates of homosexual practice often argue that "gay marriage," or at least homosexual civil unions, will reduce promiscuity and promote fidelity among homosexual persons. Such an argument overlooks two key points.

First, legal and ecclesiastical embrace of homosexual unions is more likely to undermine the institution of marriage and produce other negative effects than it is to make fidelity and longevity the norm for homosexual unions.

Second, and even more importantly, homosexual unions are not wrong primarily because of their disproportionately high incidence of promiscuity (especially among males) and breakups (especially among females). They are wrong because "gay marriage" is a contradiction in terms. As with consensual adult incest and polyamory, considerations of commitment and fidelity factor only after certain structural prerequisites are met.

The vision of marriage found in the Jewish and Christian Scriptures is one of reuniting male and female into an integrated sexual whole. Marriage is not just about more intimacy and sharing one's life with another in a lifelong partnership. It is about sexual merger—or, in Scripture's understanding, re-merger—of essential maleness and femaleness.

The creation story in Genesis 2:18-24 illustrates this point beautifully. An originally binary, or sexually undifferentiated, adam ("earthling") is split down the "side" (a better translation of Hebrew tsela than "rib") to form two sexually differentiated persons. Marriage is pictured as the reunion of the two constituent parts or "other halves," man and woman.

By definition homosexual desire is sexual narcissism or sexual self-deception. There is either a conscious recognition that one desires in another what one already is and has as a sexual being, or a self-delusion of sorts in which the sexual same is perceived as some kind of sexual other.

The New Testament recognizes the importance of the Genesis creation stories for establishing a "two-sexes" or "other-sex" prerequisite for marriage.

St. Paul clearly understood same-sex intercourse as an affront to the Creator's stamp on gender in Genesis 1-2. In his letter to the Romans, Paul cites two prime examples of humans suppressing the truth about God evident in creation/nature: idolatry and same-sex intercourse (1:18-27).

In 1 Corinthians 6:9 Paul mentions "men who lie with males" (arsenokoitai)—a term formed from the absolute prohibitions of man-male intercourse in Lev 18:22 and 20:13—in a list of offenders that risk not inheriting the kingdom of God.

It is not mere coincidence that when Jesus dealt with an issue of sexual behavior in Mark 10:2-12 he cited the same two texts from Genesis, 1:27 and 2:24, that lie behind Paul's critique of homosexual practice. Jesus adopted a "back-to-creation" model of sexuality.

The unanimous and unequivocal opposition to same-sex intercourse that persisted in early Judaism and in early Christianity leaves little doubt about what Jesus' view was.

Returning to the first point, the social-scientific evidence to date does not encourage the notion that validating homosexual unions is a win-win situation. A series of articles in 2004 by Stanley Kurtz, a Harvard-trained social anthropologist and fellow at the Hoover Institution, show that the introduction of same-sex registered partnerships in Scandinavia has coincided with a sharp rise in out-of-wedlock births.

In Sweden and Norway from 1990 to 2000—the period roughly coinciding with the introduction of same-sex registered partnerships—out-of-wedlock births increased roughly 10%.

In Denmark about 60% of firstborn children now have unmarried parents. Since the introduction of registered partnerships in the Netherlands in 1997, out-of-wedlock births have increased annually there by two percentage points—double the average annual increase of the previous 15 years.

Moreover, a 2004 study of divorce rates for same-sex registered partnerships in Sweden from 1995 to 2002 indicates that, compared to opposite-sex married couples, male homosexual couples were 1.5 times more likely to divorce and female homosexual couples 3 times more likely.

It is important to note, too, that only a tiny minority of the homosexual population has taken advantage of civil recognition of homosexual unions. According to the 2004 study, the number of same-sex registered partnerships contracted in Sweden from 1995 to 2002 is only one-half of one percent of the number of opposite-sex marriages created in the same interval.

Besides severing the institution of marriage from the values of childrearing, monogamy, and longevity, "gay marriage" will have at least three other catastrophic effects: First, we can expect an eventual end to any structural prerequisites for a legitimate sexual relationship. Second, there is good evidence that societal approval of homosexual practice may increase the incidence of homosexuality and bisexuality. Third, "gay marriage," as the ultimate legal sanctioning of homosexual behavior, will bring with it a wave of intolerance toward those who publicly express disapproval of homosexual practice.

In sum, why is "gay marriage" wrong? Most importantly, the idea of "gay marriage" is an oxymoron and a rejection of a core value in Judeo-Christian sexual ethics. Marriage requires the two sexes to reconstitute a sexual whole. "Gay marriage" is also wrong because, rather than moderating the excesses of homosexual behavior, it will weaken the institution of marriage.

© 2004 Robert A. J. Gagnon