So, we deviate from our regular programming to briefly discuss some thoughts I've had. Specifically covering gay marriage. When Christians talk about why gay marriage is wrong, they usually quote the Bible, or mention that it's unnatural. Both are true, but if you're talking to someone who doesn't believe the Bible, well, that doesn't work. And if you say it's unnatural, so was interracial marriage, and we all know that was wrong. In the end, a lot of the arguments I've seen have been very close minded arguments. It's wrong because it's wrong.... that doesn't help anyone, and just sounds intolerant. I believe it is wrong, but answers like that aren't helping anyone's point. Most likely, they're actually hindering. So, I've been thinking about this a lot, and this is the conclusion I've come to.
If we want to talk about how marriage must be between a man and a woman, we have to clarify why it has to be between a man and a woman. What about marriage makes requires this distinction? This question in my mind extended to a new question. Why is it important that we get married? Most of us would say, you marry someone because you love them and want to spend the rest of your life with them. Well, that is exactly why homosexual people want to get married. They love their partner and want to spend the rest of their life with that person. So to say you're against their marriage when we're defining the purpose of marriage as a way to spend the rest of your life committed to the one you love, you are saying that you're against others' expression of love. That doesn't sound right. No Christian person would truly be against love, or showing that love towards another. Aren't we all striving for charity, which is the pure, nonjudgmental love of Christ?
I maintain that same gender attraction is wrong, but this logic against it is also deeply flawed. So again, I return to my question, what is the purpose of marriage, and what about that makes it essential that it is between a man and a woman? This question took me a long time to find the answer to, but I think I finally have. Marriage is not about love. Yes, I said it... strange idea, considering the culture we are raised in which is so fixated on the idea of true love, everlasting love. No, the purpose of marriage is not love. The purpose of marriage is: CHILDREN.
This is a hard pill to swallow. It was for me too. But that is why it is important to get married. In the words of Dallin H Oaks, (a man I respect deeply and an apostle of the LDS church), "[Marriage] has provided the cultural tie that seeks to connect the father to his children by binding him to the mother of his children." Marriage is for creating and raising children. The best environment to make them in involves a man and a woman. The best environment for raising them also requires a man and a woman, or a father and a mother.
We are a rather self-centered culture. It is hard to imagine that the reason you get married is not for you, but for the next generation, the act of parenting. This is an act that I am coming more and more to know is a very self sacrificing act. But this is the true purpose of marriage. Love does and should have a place in marriage. But it is not the purpose, it is the reward. The greatest reward for raising children is having the love of your spouse. As you go through life together, raising children together, you encounter trials that can strengthen your love for each other. Your reward for weathering these trials is the opportunity to live with the person you love for eternity. So yes, we do get married because we love someone and want that opportunity, but the purpose for getting married is to raise children. Living with the love of your life is the reward that comes from getting married.
If children is the purpose for getting married, and love is the reward, not the reason, then it is much easier to see why gay marriage is wrong. There is no way that two men, or two women can create a child. Yes, there is adoption, but that is the exception, they still cannot create a child. Gay marriage is wrong because it thwarts the entire purpose of marriage. It makes creating a family nearly impossible. They may be in love, but they cannot have a child, which is why marriage must remain between a man and a woman. This is why it is wrong, and this is why I am opposed to gay marriage.
On another note, if we accepted the idea that love is the reward of marriage, perhaps we would feel less entitled to love, and more willing to earn it, as rewards should be. Then when love waxes cold and we believe we must end the marriage with divorce, it is not our spouse's fault, but ours, for not working to earn the reward.
Also, you should know, I'm a big fan of love. I do believe it is important in a marriage. As a matter of fact, I am crazy in love with my husband and I married him because I was in love with him, and I plan to be in love with him for eternity.
If you want to read more about this, check out this talk:Dallin H Oaks "Protect the children" Or this article, by a child who was actually raised by lesbian women:http://catholicexchange.com/what-do-the-children-say/
I appreciate that you recognize that using the Bible to argue against gay marriage is mostly futile. I also appreciate that you've put a lot of thought into this issue.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with your assertion that the purpose of marriage is to have children. To be honest, it seems like you started with your conclusion (gay marriage is wrong) and then tried to find a somewhat socially acceptable reason for why gay marriage is legitimately different from straight marriage—a reason that would justify gay marriage being "wrong."
Let's say that you're right and that gay marriage really is wrong because such a union can't produce children. Still, what is the real harm in letting a gay couple marry? If they don't adopt and can't have kids, then there are no children in the equation who can be potentially harmed by being raised by two members of the same sex (that is, of course, assuming that a heterosexual couple is even the ideal for parents. I believe that most gendered traits are cultural and not innate, which would mean that same gender couples could still rear children with the right balance of "masculine" and "feminine" traits. Even the article you linked to said that the jury is out on whether or not gay parenting is inferior to straight parenting).
If children are the prerequisite to a marriage being "right," you are excluding all couples who either choose not to or cannot have children. I wonder if your perspective would be different if you were not a mother and/or were infertile instead. If you weren't a mother, your marriage would be "wrong." It is a strange dichotomy you've set up that marriage with children equals valid and marriage without children equals invalid.
You also say that you "maintain that same gender attraction is wrong." Do you really mean that the very act of being attracted to the same gender is wrong? The way you've worded it sounds like you do and that you think that having homosexual feelings is a choice. Do you instead mean that having a romantic relationship (which can involve anything from hand holding to sex) with the opposite gender is wrong? If so, why do you think that acting on those feelings of attraction is wrong?
I am sorry, I misspoke, I did mean that acting on those feelings is wrong. I cannot speak about if it is a choice or not, because I have never been in that position. Acting on it is a choice, and that is wrong.
ReplyDeleteI did not speak to many of the points you outline here because my reasoning for those is purely religious and has no value if you do not share my beliefs. I do believe that infertile couples will have the chance to raise children, just not in this life. And if I were infertile, perhaps I would not be saying this, but not because it isn't true. Instead it would be because it would be too hard of a truth for me to accept at the time.
Remember, I did begin this with addressing the problems of Christian arguments against gay marriage, and I am a Christian, which means that many of my reasonings are based on my beliefs, that you may not share.
Thank you for the reply! I just have one more thought. I do really respect and appreciate that you admit that your reasoning for why gay marriage is wrong is religious; some people step around that and don't mention that the main reason they are against gay marriage is that their religion opposes it.
ReplyDeleteThe problem I see, however, is that—assuming you would vote against legalizing gay marriage—you are making people abstain from something just because according to your religious beliefs it is wrong. Jews believe eating pork is wrong, but they aren't trying to create legislation that bans it for everyone. I know eating kosher and gay marriage are separate issues, but the principle still remains. You clearly aren't going to have a homosexual relationship with anyone, so you're in the clear as far as your religion goes; but why do you have to forbid the rest of the population from having one?