Gay marriage was banned in Michigan in
2004. 59% of voters voted "yes" on Proposal 2, which amended the
Michigan Constitution as follows:
Sec. 25. To secure and preserve
the benefits of marriage for our society and for future generations
of children, the union of one man and one woman in marriage shall be
the only agreement recognized as a marriage or similar union for any
§ 25 Marriage.
approved Nov. 2, 2004, Eff. Dec. 18, 2004.
Look at the reason given in the
amendment for why only unions between a man and a woman are recognized:
To secure and preserve the benefits
of marriage for our society and for future generations of children .
That doesn't make the least bit of
sense. The amendment doesn't secure and preserve the benefits of
marriage; it denies
them to the gay couples in our society. The amendment is a
sham and needs to be repealed.
What the anti-gay marriage people want
us to believe is that somehow gay marriage will jeopardize heterosexual
marriage. Just how this would happen is hard to imagine. Most married
couples know that strains on the marriage come primarily from what goes
on between the two partners, not what's happening with other couples.
Another couple's blissful relationship doesn't make yours any better,
and their troubles don't hurt your marriage.
I think that some people are just
uncomfortable with the idea of homosexuality, but rather than
openly condemn the homosexuals directly - which might appear unchristian
- they indirectly demean gays by opposing any legislation that
would suggest homosexuality is normal and accepted. When it comes to
opposing gay marriage, they have to hide their true intentions by
concocting a reason other than that homosexuality is wrong. Thus, the
argument that gay marriage would jeopardize heterosexual marriage.
Here is what the Catholic Church and
James Dobson of Focus on the Family say about it. Note that neither cite
any Biblical prohibition.
The Catholic Church is against gay
marriage although it "takes a very high view of marriage and human
sexuality". So it says in a
gay marriage on the website Catholic Answers. Heterosexual married couples
are happier, healthier and richer. So why deny gay couples happiness,
health and wealth? Because
There is no data showing similar
benefits for same-sex couples. We don't know whether same-sex
couples would enjoy any of these benefits, and there are reasons to
think they would not.
Same sex marriage has been legal in The
Netherlands since 2001, and there must be thousands of gay couples who
have lived as unmarried couples for decades. If there is "no
data", it is because the Catholic Church has not looked for it. The
Church should be ashamed to deny gays the tremendous benefits of
marriage without the data to support its position.
One of the reasons the Catholic Church
thinks gay marriages would not be as wonderful as heterosexual marriages
is that they would lack "sexual complementarity".
[N]either a man by himself nor a
woman by herself is biologically completely human.
Take note, all you single adults out there:
the Church says you are biologically incomplete humans.
Each lacks the perfections and
capabilities of the opposite sex, and in that sense each is
incomplete - and lonely - without the other
. . . without the complementarity between a man and a woman on all
these levels, the deepest forms of union are not possible.
The unity possible to two men or two women will be necessarily
lopsided, both spiritually and anatomically, and therefore
And all you gay couples have noticed,
of course, that you are anatomically lopsided.
Two men together cannot capture the
fullness of human personhood, and neither can two women; for that,
you need one man and one woman. However exclusive, unconditional and
permanent same-sex relationships may aspire to be, they lack the
complementarity that the deepest fulfillment requires. This fact may
explain some of the amazing sexual behavior in the homosexual
Sexual complementarity between man
and woman makes possible another feature of marriage: the giving of
life. The love between man and woman is designed to call new human
life into existence and in so doing make the shared life of the
couple more abundantly fulfilling. It does not always produce new
life, but that is what it is designed to do. So marriage, to
succeed, must be exclusive, permanent, unconditional, and open to
What if, as a man, you are not
attracted to women? Or you are a woman who is not attracted to men?
Wouldn't a heterosexual marriage be somewhat less than satisfying in
spite of the sexual complementarity?
Even if it was true that homosexual
marriage would lack all the wonderfulness of heterosexual marriage, how
would it threaten heterosexual marriage?
One of the downsides to redefining
marriage to include same-sex couples would be the weakening of the
meaning of marriage, which would cause more divorces.
How would allowing gay marriage weaken
the meaning of marriage? The Catholic Church does not explain,
but it does say that
If homosexual "marriage" were to be
legalized, and homosexuals were later found to be unable to create
exclusive, permanent, unconditional marriages, their failure would
reinforce the idea that marriage lacks these qualities and is just a
matter of private happiness to be discarded on whim. That would be a
great step backward for society, for it would increase divorce and
all its associated pathology and create yet another impediment to
the happiness and fulfillment of millions of people.
So the contention that gay marriage
would jeopardize heterosexual marriage is
based on two possible but improbable outcomes:
- Gay marriages would be more likely
- Failure of gay marriages would
make the whole institution seem less permanent and cause
heterosexual couples to take it less seriously.
What if the truth turns out to be that
homosexual marriages are found to be more stable than
heterosexual marriages? Does that mean heterosexual couples should be denied
the right to marry?
James Dobson/Focus on the Family
from the Focus on the Family website: