Same-Sex Marriage: What's the Harm?

"If you tell a child that somebody has to be their friend, I suppose you can force the child to say, this is my friend, but it changes the definition of what it means to be a friend. And that’s it seems to me what the — what supporters of Proposition 8 are saying here. You’re -­ all you’re interested in is the label and you insist on changing the definition of the label." Chief Justice John Roberts

Once upon a time there was a society that considered marriage to be the union of one man and one woman. Out of that union under normal circumstances would come children, and thus society would continue to grow and prosper.

Along came some people who weren't satisfied with the definition that had held societies together for thousands of years. They felt that it should also include two people of the same sex who were in love and wanted to get married. They took to the streets to protest. Those who disagreed with them were labelled narrow-minded and bigoted. They compared their protests to the civil rights movement of the 1960s. They took the issue to the courts - and won! Over time homosexuality was considered normal.

A few years later another group of people expressed dissatisfaction with the definition of marriage. The ringleader was a man who was deeply in love with three women and saw no reason why he shouldn't be allowed to marry all three of them if he wished. In fact it was touted that there shouldn't be any limits on how many people there could be in a marriage. Even some "Christians" got on board this particular bandwagon, citing "biblical" support for the concept of polygamy. Those who objected were labelled narrow-minded and bigoted. They were the new civil rights movement in America and took to the streets and eventually to the courts - and won! Over time polygamy was considered normal.

Over the next several years in this great land more groups of people arose who were dissatisfied with the current definition of marriage. Love is love, after all, whether it's between two people, ten people, two dogs, ten dogs, a human and a dog, two humans and two cats, or a human and a child! Yes, a child. If the child is willing, what's wrong with marriage between an adult and a child? After all, the important factor is love, isn't it? They took to the streets. Those who objected were called bigots, narrow-minded. Even dangerous to society. Of course, eventually the courts had to agree, and marriage became whatever was acceptable at the time.

Does this seem like a ridiculous story to you? Especially those of you who see nothing wrong with homosexuality? After all, homosexuality is one thing, but those other practices are going too far! It's immoral! It's wrong!

Really? Fifty years ago the idea of the country recognizing same-sex marriages seemed ridiculous as well. They would have called it immoral, sick, wrong! But today more and more people are accepting it. What happened? Did society evolve? Did they get rid of those absurd religious taboos drilled into their psyche over thousands of years and finally began to think clearly? If so, maybe those of you who support gay marriage also haven't evolved far enough and you're still so narrow-minded that you can't accept another definition of marriage!

That was Chief Justice John Roberts' point. People want to redefine the term "marriage." Over time it could be redefined so many different ways that the term becomes meaningless.

Certain practices may seem offensive to you now, but with enough years of gradual conditioning - actually, it's called brain-washing - it would become acceptable.

So first we redefine marriage. What's next? Maybe we can redefine the term "medical doctor," to mean anyone who has read three medical journal articles and has a sincere desire to help others. Who are you to decide someone has to spend several years in medical school to become a physician?

You might ask, "So what's the harm? You believe in heterosexual marriage, fine! Go ahead and marry someone of the opposite sex. I have no objection. I'm more open-minded than you are. But let me marry someone of the same sex and respect my right to do so. I'm not affecting you or anyone else!"

Is that true? You're not affecting me or anyone else?

Picture the day when homosexual marriage is now considered legitimate. The happy gay couple come to a motel and want a room for the night. However, the motel owner is a Christian and objects to renting them a room on moral grounds. He won't tolerate that kind of behavior in his establishment. The happy gay couple sue the motel owner and he is found guilty of discrimination. The happy couple, in order to preserve their new-found "freedom" has taken away the freedom of another person to practice his beliefs. In fact, it's the state interfering in the affairs of the church!

In fact, the rights of all practicing Christians are going to be infringed on if they stand up for what they believe in. If churches are ordered to accept practicing homosexuals in their church or lose tax-exempt status, or face imprisonment, they are losing their rights. If Christians or other groups who object to homosexuality are forced into silence, then who is suppressing who? You who claim you've had to hide in the closet are going to be trying to force others to go into their own closets.

Secondly, non-Christians are fond of saying that Christians are trying to shove their morals down the throats of the non-religious people. However, in this case, by redefining marriage, the minority is forcing the majority to accept their definition of marriage. The minority is now doing the shoving.

Third, there are the dangers involved in changing moral values. Over the decades it hasn't been an increase in conservative sexual morals but a decrease in conservative sexual morals that has resulted in a rapid increase in pornography - including child pornography, prostitution and sex trafficking. Naturally, the world's answer to this would be to legalize all of the above and the problem is gone!

Let's also keep in mind that AIDS is dominant in the gay community. It would be futile for homosexuals to try and say it's just as common in the heterosexual world. However, through drug paraphernalia and through people practicing bisexuality, it has, in fact, spread to the heterosexual community. So we see that the abnormal behavior of the homosexual has had an impact on the majority who don't engage in this behavior.

Trial lawyer Roger J. Magnuson sums up this issue this way: “Homosexuals have all of the same rights heterosexuals do. They are protected by the Bill of Rights, by federal and state statutes, and by common-law decisions. They have the same status before the law as do other citizens….The issue is not whether rights have been infringed. The issue is whether new rights, not previously recognized, should be created.” [Roger J. Magnuson, Are Gay Rights Right? updated edition (Portland: Multnomah Press, 1990), 78.]

Society has gone down the path of abandoning truth. As Nietzsche was fond of saying, there are no absolute truths anymore. Truth becomes what is true for you, but it might not be true for me. Likewise, moral values are being abandoned.

The futility of such thinking should be evident. You may think it's wrong for me to steal from you, but I, in all sincerity, may think it's morally right to steal from you - especially if you have more than I do. Both of us can't be right. So how do we determine who is right?

You may say that it's wrong when I hurt someone else? But who determines that? That's just your moral view. Mine may be that sometimes it's okay to hurt others. Who is to say that you're right and I'm wrong?

This is what happens when people try to change morals, try to change truth, try to redefine something that has been around since the beginning of time. This is why Christians follow the values given to us in Scripture. They are values we are born with. We KNOW it's wrong to steal and to kill. But over time and through exposure to the world and the world's values, those values can get distorted. Consciences become singed.

One of the factors that led to the fall of the Roman Empire was moral decay. Sadly, this is what we are seeing today, and this country will, unfortunately, reap the consequences.

Update: Those who don't think the legalization of gay marriage isn't a slippery slope leading to other forms of marriage need only read this story from the Los Angeles Times of Dec. 17, 2013 on polygamy or this story on the possible legalization of incest from NBC News on Sept. 25, 2014.

Link: The Meaning of Marriage

Since this article was written, much of what I predicted is, indeed, happening. Consider these links:

Justice Brings Up Polygamy in Prop 8 Gay Marriage Case

Advocates of Sex with Children Want Same Rights as Homosexuals