04 January, 2013

Rebuttals to arguments for same-sex marriage

Rebuttals to arguments for same-sex marriage


  1. 1) "They still saw it, in general, as a public, lifelong partnership between one man and one woman for the sake of generating and raising children."

    In OT times marriage was between one man and many women. Marriages today are not forced to be life long, divorce can occur. Children are not always part of marriages as there are marriages between couples who are sterile either by age or physical reasons.

    2) " Equality is not equivalency." Sounds very close to separate but equal.
    "same-sex couples cannot produce children, nor ensure a child’s basic right to be raised by his mother and father." Elderly couples cannot produce children and do we take children away from families where one parent dies or abandons the family. Do we ban orphanages because a child is denied a right to a mother and father?

    3. "Everyone has the right to marry whomever he or she loves." No one believes this slogan. Red herring

    4) "Same-sex marriage won’t affect you, so what’s the big deal?" I've asked many people here in Canada how same sex marriage has affected them personally and not have come up with an answer beyond they don't like it or disagree with it. Does allowing same sex marriage affect people anymore than allowing a divorced person to remarry?

    5. "Same-sex marriage will not lead to other redefinition." Many countries have polygamy and that hasn't lead to bestiality or anything like that.

    6. "If same-sex couples can’t marry because they can’t reproduce, why can infertile couples marry?" Mu aunt had a hysterectomy and she remarried in the Catholic Church. That wasn't misdiagnosed and there's absolutely not chance of her having a child now.

    7. "Children will not be affected since there is no difference between same-sex parents and opposite-sex parents." To anyone who thinks children are being abused y being raised by a gay couple, tell it to the couple they know. Put your money where your mouth is. As a leader in a youth group I am bound by law to report suspected cases of child abuse. I would if I believed it was so. Why don't you?

    8 "Opposition to same-sex marriage is based on bigotry, homophobia and religious hatred." Yes, it';s suffering the same fate as opposition to mixed race marriages. When I was grwoing up there was open opposition to mixed race marriages and adults frequently voiced it. Now they would be vilified and shunned if they uttered the same statements. Society changes, mores change. You can't force people to agree with you. Those days are gone.

    9. "The struggle for same-sex marriage is just like the civil rights movement of the 1960s." It's more that the people who are in favour of same sex marriage learned from the civil rights movement how to champion a cause.

    10. "Same-sex marriage is inevitable, so we should stand on the right side of history." Canada has had same sex marriage for about 10 years. There was opposition when it was brought in with religions saying that they would be forced to perform same sex marriages (has never happened) and now if you talk to almost anyone it's not an issue. Even if they don't agree with same sex marriage themselves, most see no issue with other same sex couples in different or no religions being married.

  2. Rationalist: Thank you for such a complete yet succinct response. While we've discussed most of them before, I was startled to read #5. I think the more appropriate question to ask is can you name one of the countries which practice polygamy who would be counted among the industrially/socially/economically advanced countries? I can't think of one. Can you?

    Fr. Tim

  3. There may not be many current western countries that allow polygamy (Utah in the 1800's is the closest I can think of) but soon there won't be an industrially/socially/economically advanced countries that doesn't allow some form of gay marriage.

    And just like religions are free to disallow from marrying whomever they want, seeking to impose their norms on the general public will solicit general disappropriation and I think that's what's causing many religious people the most concern and will ultimately affect many people's participation in those denomination.

    One can see that in non religious organizations where Scouting in the USA is losing support and membership because of its ban on gay Scouts (Scouts Canada has no such ban). Especially among the principled young people, discrimination against their friends will cause many to question their membership.

    1. Rationalist: What you are really saying is that people will reject the Church and her teachings because it will not permit people to do whatever they want with the assurance that they stand OK before God. You may be right. But, when we look at the churches that have walked down that road it's easy to see that such a hedonistic approach leads almost certainly to the destruction of that community.

      So are we really in bad shape by choosing not to follow what has been demonstrated to be a failed path? Time will tell, but I like our chances.

      Fr. Tim

    2. Not that they will reject the Church for not letting them do what they want, but not doing what they feel to be the right thing.

      Most people I know who support gay marriage are not gay themselves and do not want to participate in a gay marriage themselves. They have no self interest in that issue.

      They respect the right of the Church to preach against gay marriage but do not want to be associated with an organization that does such. Unlike say contraception which affects heterosexual couples and one could argue that they are rejecting the Church teaching because they want to do what they want, gay marriage for most people is different.


Followers of this blog:

Blog Archive

Google Analytics