Gay Marriage

Preface

This is a controversial topic for Christians and my views are especially unusual. Here's the gist of my views ...

• Promiscuous relations involving many partners or with violence and abuse are sinful — sexual orientation is not the issue at all in these cases.
• Humans thrive in long-term, committed, healthy relationships.
• Sexuality is a part of human nature.
• The Bible condemns homosexuality often but always in the context of violence, pleasure-seeking promiscuity, or pagan ritual prostutition.
• There is not one passage in the Bible condemning long-term, committed gay relationships.
• Some gay rights activists don't honor the right of their fellow citizens to live a wholesome life and subject the culture at large to their perverse and deviant lifestyle. This is rather rude of them.
• Gay Christians sometimes interpret various Bible passages incorrectly to support their views, for example, that the sin of those in Sodom was merely that they were inhospitable to strangers.
• There are health factors involved in gay sex, especially for men.
• It is not my place to judge others and their choices.
• Gays have been discriminated against. This should change.
• Sexuality should not be a public matter. It should not be represented as it is in the meda and entertainment industries. It should remain a private topic in human interactions. I should not have to encounter people in public flaunting their sexuality.

Opening the Floodgates ...

In this article ...

Having been a fundamentalist evangelical Protestant and now as a devout orthodox Catholic, I was taught that practising homosexuals are living in serious sin. When the gay rights movement began to make inroads into society the floodgates were opened and I have had to adapt.

In round one of the gay rights movement, gays demanded that society recognize their right to be gay. Suddenly, gay men begain to feel comfortable in violating my personal space and I felt exploited by them in subtle ways. Strangers began touching me too long when giving me back change, looking me deeply in the eyes, and "accidently" rubbing up against me when walking by or when in the elevator. This confirmed my view that homosexuality was a form of moral perversion.

In addition, it seemed to me that the gay movement wanted as many people as possible to be gay. I was especially troubled that they attempted to influence young people into realizing that they were really gay after all.

In round two of the gay rights movement, gay couples began demanding the right to be married. They wanted to be able to raise children and to enjoy all the benefits that society grants to married couples. It seemed wrong to me that children should be brought up in an environment in which they would be influenced to be gay themselves. But I suppose that is the same objection that people have against Christians who wish to raise their children to be Christian.

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

The Innocents ...

There is one group of gay people who my heart goes out to: women who have been abused in some way by men, perhaps when they were very young, and who have bonded in a long-term relationship with another like themselves. I can imagine the love they have for one another and I cannot condemn them. Why wouldn't they want to express their feelings for one another sexually as well?

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

Perversions ...

A partial list of various immoral activities.

• Exploiting children.
• Violence (rape).

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

Motivations ...

From a spiritual perspective we should consider what motivates a person to think and act in various ways. Three categories:

1. Violence and exploitation
2. Lust and selfishness
3. Love

(1) Violence and Exploitation

Violence should never be overlooked or approved of. Our society should not tolerate people exploting other people. Exploitation and violence occur in both heterosexual and homosexual encounters. I hate to list examples but I must.

• Child molestation and pedophilia
• Rape
• Violence in the promiscuous gay community
• Pornography
• Prostitution

(2) Lust and Selfishness

Loving people care for others; this should be the goal. Unfortunately, all too often people engage in sex motivated purely by lust. Examples.

• A husband demands sex from his wife with no regard for her wishes or situation
• Promiscuity — heterosexual and homosexual
• Pornography
• Prostitution
• Any sexual activity outside of a lifelong committed relationship (break-ups and divorce do not express love)

(3) Love

All human interactions should be motivated by love. This involves doing things for the benefit of the other person. This is the standard I use in judging the morality of various human interactions.

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

Miscellaneous Considerations ...

One reason given for limiting marriage to one man and one woman is the argument from natural law; it goes like this. The purpose of sex is to procreate; in addition there in a unitive aspect. Thus, sex should only be used in the context of procreation and child-rearing. But there are various situations which don't fit this model.

• What about a married couple that tries to have children but can't? Doesn't natural law require them to stop having sex at some point?
• Similarly, what about a couple past childbearing age? Or if the woman has had a hysterectomy?
• What if a couple doesn't want to have children at all? Natural law should require their marriage and their sexual activity invalid.
• Shouldn't natural law require that couples only have sex when they are attempting to have a child. Some religious groups hold this view.
• The Catholic Church comes close to having a consistent teaching based on natural law, but there are some side-effects:
  • It is OK to "thwart" natural law by using Natural Family Planing to have sex when there is no change of conception.
  • It is OK for couples to have sex who have no hope of conceiving.
  • The dictates of natural law are limited only to not using contraception (including withdrawal).
  • There is no consideration of poverty, overpopulation, or other situations that would affect the life of any children they conceived.

Some claim that we, as humans, are sexual creatures and should therefore express our sexual nature. Others object that sexuality should only be expressed in the most restrictive of situations (marriage between one man and one woman). Those of group one typically think that it is bad to always refrain from having sex (or self-abuse) when the urge is present. Others think that it is required of people to repress their sexual urges unless they are married. If we allow that a person should never have to repress their sexual urges we end up with a strange result. If we expand on this theme to allow people to express every urge, civilization would not be possible.

There are times in a person's life when they should resist their sexual urges. Examples.

• When they are too young to properly support and raise their children.
• When their partner is not available for some reason.
• Outside of a commited, lifelong relationship. (Otherwise, the relationship is exploitative.)
• As a religious or spiritual committment.
• If they should not have children (due to genetic defects).
• Those who might be psychologically harmed by it.

Unfortunately, our society seems to think that we have a right to express our sexuality whenever we choose.

The statistics indicate that there is a higher rate of various psychological (and physical) problems among gays. Even so, not all gays fall into this category. And should we only allow people to have relationships if they are sound in mind and body? If this were the case, I'm not sure I would qualify to be married since I am somewhat eccentric myself.

One objection to allowing for gay marriage is that many gay couples don't believe it is wrong to have sexual encounters with others beside their mate. I can't comment on this statistic. However, if we allow this to disqualify someone from being married than the many heterosexual married people who believe it is OK to engage in adultery should also be barred from marriage. I don't know whether a gay married person would feel betrayed in the same way a straight married person would if their partner had sex with someone else.

LGBT — Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender. In allowing for gay marriage we must of necessity address other kinds of non-standard sexuality. It is not my intention to discuss these in this article. But these should be analyzed in terms of the considerations I outlined above (violence, exploitation, lust, selfishness, and love.)

I often read that many LGBT people have psychological problems or are unhappy, depressed, addicted to drugs and alcohol, and sometimes violent. I cannot comment on these statistics. Those in the LGBT category who do have these problems should not be considered differently than others who have same problems — there are plenty of straight alcoholics. And what of those in the LGBT category who do not have these problems? We cannot judge their condition based on problems they don't have.

A consideration from biology: the rectum should not be used in sexual activity — this organ is not designed for such activity and fecal matter is unclean.

Some say that the reason people become homosexuals is because of some disfunction or missing ingredient in their upbringing as children; that their sexual identity is not properly formed or they have a phobia against intimacy with people of the opposite sex. Even if this is true, it doesn't change the fact that the person is in this condition. If we expected everybody to be free from all harmful psychological effects then we should require nearly the entire population to have psychological counselling after high school (since so many are troubled in so many ways) — why should we have a different standard for certain people? (Note: In this article I am not addressing the topic of whether there is a genetic aspect to homosexuality.)

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

What the Bible Says ...

There are many Bible passages that speak of homosexuality. However, I am not convinced that any of these address the situation of a gay couple in a committed, lifelong relationship.

Here are the various categories of sexual activity mentioned in the Bible (and the Bible's assessment):

Heterosexual

• Rape — bad (violent)
• Sexual abuse of children — bad (exploitative and/or violent)
• Ritual sex in Pagan temples — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Prostitution — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Sexual orgies — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Promiscous sexual relations — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Marriage — good (love)

Homosexual

• Rape — bad (violent)
• Sexual abuse of children — bad (exploitative and/or violent)
• Ritual sex in Pagan temples — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Prostitution — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Sexual orgies — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Promiscous sexual relations — bad (exploitative / lust)
• Marriage — not mentioned

Based on the categories I present above (violence, exploitation, lust, selfishness, love) we see that the Bible has the correct assessment of all these activities.

Here are the passages with my comments:

Likewise also was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the messengers, and had sent them out another way? (James 2:25)

Note that she demonstrated her faith by protecting the spies, not by quitting being a harlot. Once she became a member of the nation of Israel she certainly was no longer a harlot. We simply don't know whether she stopped before that.

So it came to pass, when the king's commandment and his decree was heard, and when many maidens were gathered together unto Shushan the palace, to the custody of Hegai, that Esther was brought also unto the king's house, to the custody of Hegai, keeper of the women. (Esther 2:8)

It is very strange that Esther is considered a hero of the faith when she was a member of the king's harem.

And Abraham said of Sarah his wife, She is my sister: and Abimelech king of Gerar sent, and took Sarah. (Genesis 20:2)

It seems odd that a hero of the faith would give up his wife to a stranger knowing that it might result in sexual activity.

And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them. (Genesis 19:5)

These men were violent and wished to rape Lot's guests.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves. . . . For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly. (Romans 1:24,26-27)

The context is idolatry which included orgies.

And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. . . . Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. (Romans 1:23,25)

The natural use of sexuality is in the context of marriage between one man and one woman, but because these people were so intoxicated with lust they even participated in promiscuous heterosexual as well as homosexual activities.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind. (1 Corinthians 6:9)

A list of people who are not saved:

• Fornicators — Those (presumably men) engaged in sexual relations with outside of marriage.
• Effeminate — Unclear what this means, but almost certainly refers to a person practicing promiscuous homosexual sex.
• Abusers of themselves with mankind — A person practicing promiscuous homosexual sex.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine. (1 Timothy 1:10)

A list of people who are not saved:

• Whoremongers — A man who regularly has sex with prostitutes.
• Them that defile themselves with mankind — A person practicing promiscuous homosexual sex.
• Menstealers — This is really bad. It involves kidnapping, rape, and probably pedophilia.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

Even as Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire. (Jude 1:7)

Notice that it is fornication or sex outside of marriage which is the issue. These even fornicated with those of the same sex. These sexual encounters were violent and perverse.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. (Matthew 19:4-6)

Certainly God created human sexuality for the purpose of procreation which requires a male and a female. And certainly a child who is raised in the home of a loving couple will be blessed by this.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. (Genesis 2:24)

The norm is marriage between one man and one woman. There are many example in the Bible in which one set of passages define the norm and others give exceptions.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

And he brake down the houses of the sodomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove. (2 Kings 23:7)

This passage refers to pagan rituals involving homosexual relations.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

There shall be no whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel. (Deuteronomy 23:17)

This passage refers to pagan rituals involving prostitution and homosexual relations.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel. . . . And he took away the sodomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made. (1 Kings 14:24; 15:12)

This passage refers to pagan rituals involving homosexual relations.

This verse does not address sex between two people of the same sex who are in a lifelong commited relationship.

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination. Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion. (Leviticus 18:22-23)

The idea of a commited relationship between two people of the same sex was not a part of this culture and is simply not addressed in this passage.

There are other passages but they are similar to the ones I've quoted.

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page

Justification ...

Most fundamentalist evangelical Protestants will be horrified by my conclusions so I justify my methodology here.

Based on the foundational Protestant doctrine of Sola Scriptura, it is acceptable to hold any view you wish as long as the following conditions hold true:

• The Bible doesn't speak on the topic.
• The Bible doesn't contradict the view by way of application of various related passages.

Again, based on Sola Scriptura, I am free to develop any view I wish as long as I can support it from the Bible or as long as the Bible doesn't clearly refute it — in fact, I am required to believe the Bible rather than preachers, teachers, theologians, or anyone else. As I have shown, the Bible does not clearly address the topic of whether it is OK for two people of the same sex to have sexual relations in a committed lifelong relationship of love.

There are many examples from the Bible (and the early church) in which practices and beliefs of the time have been superseded by "modern" views. (But not all modern views are better.) Some examples of changes (for the better):

• Slavery was accepted in Bible times and even Jesus did not oppose it.
• Death penalty in the Old Testament for minor offenses.
• Women's role in the culture.
• Kill innocents in war.
• Freedom of religion in a society.
• The idea in the early church that the church was an institution which should have authority over the secular powers.

I believe there are many abuses and contradictions in the gay rights movement; many outrages against Biblical morality; many perverse and unhappy people who call themselves gay. However, in the one case of a committed lifelong, loving relationship, I cannot in good conscience pass judgment.

Moral Theology & Ethics | North Forest Home | Top of page