Tag Archives: Gay Marriage

Top Ten Myths about Homosexuality – #2 Post of 2010

Post Author: Bill Pratt

I have written previously on why the state should not endorse gay marriage. I received numerous comments on that post and if you bother to read through all of them, you will find that they quickly move toward the question of whether the gay lifestyle is good for those in it and whether those in it should be raising children.

As a continuation of that discussion, I want to point my readers to a pamphlet written by the Family Research Council called “The Top Ten Myths About Homosexuality.” The pamphlet is well written and seems to be well researched, with copious citations of scientific papers.

Below are the ten myths which are expanded upon in the article.

Myth No. 1: People are born gay.

Fact: The research does not show that anyone is “born gay,” and suggests instead that homosexuality results from a complex mix of developmental factors.

Myth No. 2: Sexual orientation can never change.

Fact: Thousands of men and women have testified to experiencing a change in their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual. Research confirms that such change does occur—sometimes spontaneously, and sometimes as a result of therapeutic interventions.

Myth No. 3: Efforts to change someone’s sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual are harmful and unethical.

Fact: There is no scientific evidence that change efforts create greater harm than the homosexual lifestyle itself. The real ethical violation is when clients are denied the opportunity to set their own goals for therapy.

Myth No. 4: Ten percent of the population is gay.

Fact: Less than three percent of American adults identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual.

Myth No. 5: Homosexuals do not experience a higher level of psychological disorders than heterosexuals.

Fact: Homosexuals experience considerably higher levels of mental illness and substance abuse than heterosexuals. A detailed review of the research has shown that “no other group of comparable size in society experiences such intense and widespread pathology.”

Myth No. 6: Homosexual conduct is not harmful to one’s physical health.

Fact: Both because of high-risk behavior patterns, such as sexual promiscuity, and because of the harm to the body from specific sexual acts, homosexuals are at greater risk than heterosexuals for sexually transmitted diseases and other forms of illness and injury.

Myth No. 7: Children raised by homosexuals are no different from children raised by heterosexuals, nor do they suffer harm.

Fact: An overwhelming body of social science research shows that children do best when raised by their own biological mother and father who are committed to one another in a lifelong marriage. Research specifically on children of homosexuals has major methodological problems, but does show specific differences.

Myth No. 8: Homosexuals are no more likely to molest children than heterosexuals.

Fact: Sexual abuse of boys by adult men is many times more common than consensual sex between adult men, and most of those engaging in such molestation identify themselves as homosexual or bisexual.

Myth No. 9: Homosexuals are seriously disadvantaged by discrimination.

Fact: Research shows that homosexuals actually have significantly higher levels of educational attainment than the general public, while the findings on homosexual incomes are, at worst, mixed.

Myth No. 10: Homosexual relationships are just the same as heterosexual ones, except for the gender of the partners.

Fact: Homosexuals are less likely to enter into a committed relationship, less likely to be sexually faithful to a partner, even if they have one, and are less likely to remain committed for a lifetime, than are heterosexuals. They also experience higher rates of domestic violence than heterosexual married couples.

I ask you to go read the entire article to get the details behind these claims; they are backed up by research citations. The bottom line is this: science shows that the gay lifestyle is generally destructive of those in it and we should not, as a society, be promoting it.

Does this mean that every gay person experiences the problems cited in the research? Obviously not. We’re dealing with statistics and probabilities, so there are absolutely gay people who are exceptions to the research findings. However, the gay marriage movement is asking for a state endorsement of their lifestyle, and the only way we can approach this issue is to look statistically at those who practice the lifestyle.

 

Have You Signed the Manhattan Declaration Yet?

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Almost one year ago, I wrote a short blog post asking our readers to sign a document called the Manhattan Declaration.  Why am I back again asking you to sign?  Because we need more of you to participate.

So far, the declaration has gathered 476,000 signatures – impressive, but not enough.  We should easily be able to get over 1 million signatures on this document – after all, if you are a Christian, or a person who believes in the sanctity of life, the sanctity of marriage, and the sanctity of religious liberty, then you should have no problem signing this document.

What does the declaration say about these issues?  Well, you can read it for yourself in full, or you can read a few excerpts from it below.

First of all, why these three principles instead of a myriad other possibilities?

Because the sanctity of human life, the dignity of marriage as a union of husband and wife, and the freedom of conscience and religion are foundational principles of justice and the common good, we are compelled by our Christian faith to speak and act in their defense. In this declaration we affirm: 1) the profound, inherent, and equal dignity of every human being as a creature fashioned in the very image of God, possessing inherent rights of equal dignity and life; 2) marriage as a conjugal union of man and woman, ordained by God from the creation, and historically understood by believers and non-believers alike, to be the most basic institution in society and; 3) religious liberty, which is grounded in the character of God, the example of Christ, and the inherent freedom and dignity of human beings created in the divine image.

To repeat, these are foundational issues.  Without life, without traditional marriage, and without religious liberty, our civilization crumbles.

About life, the declaration has this to say:

A truly prophetic Christian witness will insistently call on those who have been entrusted with temporal power to fulfill the first responsibility of government: to protect the weak and vulnerable against violent attack, and to do so with no favoritism, partiality, or discrimination. The Bible enjoins us to defend those who cannot defend themselves, to speak for those who cannot themselves speak. And so we defend and speak for the unborn, the disabled, and the dependent. What the Bible and the light of reason make clear, we must make clear. We must be willing to defend, even at risk and cost to ourselves and our institutions, the lives of our brothers and sisters at every stage of development and in every condition.

About marriage, the declaration has this to say:

And so it is out of love (not “animus”) and prudent concern for the common good (not “prejudice”), that we pledge to labor ceaselessly to preserve the legal definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman and to rebuild the marriage culture. How could we, as Christians, do otherwise? The Bible teaches us that marriage is a central part of God’s creation covenant. Indeed, the union of husband and wife mirrors the bond between Christ and his church. And so just as Christ was willing, out of love, to give Himself up for the church in a complete sacrifice, we are willing, lovingly, to make whatever sacrifices are required of us for the sake of the inestimable treasure that is marriage.

About religious liberty, the declaration has this to say:

The struggle for religious liberty across the centuries has been long and arduous, but it is not a novel idea or recent development. The nature of religious liberty is grounded in the character of God Himself, the God who is most fully known in the life and work of Jesus Christ. Determined to follow Jesus faithfully in life and death, the early Christians appealed to the manner in which the Incarnation had taken place: “Did God send Christ, as some suppose, as a tyrant brandishing fear and terror? Not so, but in gentleness and meekness…, for compulsion is no attribute of God” (Epistle to Diognetus 7.3-4). Thus the right to religious freedom has its foundation in the example of Christ Himself and in the very dignity of the human person created in the image of God—a dignity, as our founders proclaimed, inherent in every human, and knowable by all in the exercise of right reason.

Will you join us in signing this declaration?  Will you make your voice heard on these issues?  Please make your way to the Manhattan Declaration website and become a signatory to this important document.

Manhattan Declaration

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Recently, a group of 152 Christian leaders from Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, and Protestantism came together to sign a declaration that states in clear terms Christian support for the sanctity of life, traditional marriage, and religious freedom – all of which are under attack in the United States and around the world.

None of these positions are new, but what is remarkable is that such a large and variegated group should gather together in support of the positions.

Check out the declaration and sign it.  Let your voice be heard on these issues.

Why Should the State Endorse Gay Marriage?

Post Author: Bill Pratt

I wrote a post recently about why the state endorses and promotes marriage between a man and a woman.  Simply put, the state needs children and it needs children raised in the ideal environment for them to become productive adult citizens, which is a family headed by a man and a woman.  Biology, common sense, and vast empirical research prove this to be the case.  Additionally, traditional marriage domesticates men and protects mothers.

Based on these societal interests, why would the state want to endorse gay marriage?

Gay marriages do not produce children.  In fact, the only way a same sex couple can “produce” children is to use people from outside their marriage.  They cannot procreate by themselves and they rely on traditional male-female sexual unions to provide children.

Gay marriages are not the ideal environment to raise children.  Every single gay marriage deprives a child of either a father or a mother.  Again, nature, common sense, and empirical research all demonstrate that children thrive best when they are raised in a family with a father and mother.

Gay marriage does nothing to domesticate men.  The great majority of gay men are not monogamous; they seek sexual gratification outside their primary relationship.  One study tracked 100 gay male couples, and after 5 years not one couple could boast that both partners had remained sexually faithful.  The idea of two men gay men living faithfully in a long-term commitment is a myth.  The research proves just the opposite.

Only gay marriages between women provide any sort of security or protection for a mother.  The quality of that security is debatable, but it seems like it could provide better security than single motherhood.

So, to summarize, at least 3 out of the 4 primary reasons that the state promotes traditional marriage do not apply to gay marriages.  It is only if marriage is completely redefined and its purpose fundamentally altered that same sex marriage advocates have any kind of argument.

You may think same sex marriage is harmless to our society (I disagree but that is a topic for another day), but I want to know why the state should endorse it.  After all, that is what gay marriage advocates want – a state endorsement of their relationship.  There are plenty of relationships that are harmless that the state does not promote.  What is so special about this one?

Make an argument for why we should radically alter our marriage laws.  Show us why, if you are a gay marriage proponent, this is so good for our entire nation.

Addendum: For additional information on whether homosexuality is inherited, please see this post, and for additional arguments against gay marriage, please see this post.

Why Do Civilizations Care about Marriage?

Post Author: Bill Pratt

The ultimate reason that virtually every civilization since the dawn of man has recognized and promoted marriage between a man and a woman is because this is the one natural union that produces children.  Yes, marriage is about procreation and every civilization needs to produce children to survive and thrive.  Without children, which are produced between the sexual union of a man and woman, every nation, state, and civilization dies.  It is, therefore, supremely important to protect and promote the institution of marriage.

But there are also other reasons.  In addition to procreation, marriage between a man and woman is the best environment to raise children.  It always has been and it always will be.  Biology cannot be overruled.  Children must be raised and families with a married mother and father are the best means by which they are raised, so it is in the state’s interest to promote marriage as the best way for children to be looked after and guided toward productive adulthood.

In addition, marriage civilizes men.  Married men are more productive and well-behaved members of a society.  Single men tend to cause far more trouble for a society, so marriage is a great vehicle for the domestication of men.

Marriage protects women.  Mothers who are married are far less likely to experience violence of any kind than single mothers.  They are also protected financially if they raise their children and forgo a career outside the home if they are married to a committed husband.

These are some of the reasons why human societies have always recognized marriage between a man and a woman and why they have promoted and celebrated this institution.  These reasons are not only backed by traditional wisdom and common sense, but by empirical research.

Like it or not, healthy marriages between men and women are the bedrock of any society, so think carefully about tampering with the definition and purpose of marriage.  Think carefully about weakening this institution in any way.  If you do, you will severely degrade our national immune system.

What is the Problem with Gay Marriage?

Post Author: Bill Pratt

Well, there are many, but Wintery Knight points us to an excellent article written by Robert George that explains some of the issues quite well.  George rightly asserts that we must, as a society, agree on what marriage is before we start re-defining it.  And, it is up to the people of the United States to make this determination, not the courts.

What is marriage?  Is it merely a piece of paper?  Is it two people who have strong feelings toward each other?  Is it two or more people who want to live together, for whatever reason?  Is it all about sexual pleasure?  What is it?

Just as the key issue with abortion is defining what human life is, the key issue with gay marriage is defining what marriage is, including its purpose.  Until we debate this definition, efforts to recast marriage in the courts are getting ahead of the American people and we will end up with an even more divided nation.