Ten Reasons We’re Losing On Gay “Marriage”

We are losing on gay “marriage.” The conflict continues—there was a victory last week in North Carolina!—and the overall end is not yet clear. Still, we’ve lost millions of skirmishes: the hearts of people who think marriage is for any two adults who want to put that name on their relationship, and who think that sexual ethics are of no importance.

Here in my opinion are ten main reasons. I call your attention especially to the ninth, which has to do with paying the price it will take to turn the battle around; and also to my closing note that this is not the whole story.

1. We have been strategically oblivious. The gay-rights insurgency has been following a strategy published more than twenty years ago. Their plan had significant vulnerabilities we could have dealt with effectively in the early 1990s. Instead we paid no attention, and now the challenge is exponentially harder. Their strategy’s weaknesses remain, but the gay rights movement has amassed cultural strength to compensate.

2. We are unequipped to use our own best weaponry. There are many powerful, love-centered, natural-law arguments against gay “marriage,” but how many of us know what natural law is, or how to understand and present it in this case?

3. Even were that not the case, we live in a culture that is impervious to good reasoning, having little education or experience with genuine critical thinking, and being accustomed instead to the manipulations of sloganeering and imagery.

4. Lacking awareness of how to use own best weaponry, we are left with picking up our opponents’ missiles—that same sloganeering and imagery—and lobbing them back half-spent.

5. We have yielded authority to empirical research “experts,” forgetting that no one has any empirical information yet on what will come of a multi-generational experiment in gay “marriage.” Lacking a scientific reason to oppose gay “marriage” we have needlessly assumed we have no reason.

6. We have been weak in understanding, advocating for, and practicing the proper meaning of marriage among ourselves.

7. We are embarrassed to be involved in a “culture war,” having accepted the liberal message that it’s unseemly and that we’re responsible for it. We’re not. They invaded existing culture with dangerously disruptive cultural ordnance. We are simply trying to hold ground.

8. We are overly cautious over what we might lose—tax exemptions, jobs, reputations—by standing up for what is right.

9. We have never adopted a mindset of training for battle. Training is hard. It takes discipline, study, and the courage to face potential losses. But we have either misunderstood what it takes to prepare for a fight like this one, or we’re embarrassed to think of ourselves as being in it, or we’re unwilling to pay the price for our nation’s and our children’s spiritual, cultural, moral, and political health and safety.

10. Where we have not made the above mistakes—where we have understood, reasoned, loved, and practiced well—our voice and presence have been stifled by the educational, cultural, and media elite, who have ensured that their message would shout out above all. (We could examine the reasons that has happened, but that’s for another day.)

Soon: how we can turn this around and win on gay “marriage.” Because I believe there is hope.

Edit June 5: My follow-up post took a different direction when I gave it more thought. To frame it as winning on gay “marriage” would have been inadequate, distorted, and wrong. I have written and posted it now as A Vision For Marriage In Our Culture: Ten Essentials.

Comments 35
  1. Sheila

    If you’ve not yet done so, I would recommend all Christians read Dr. Michael Brown’s book, “A Queer Thing Happened to America–and what a long strange trip it’s been.” It’s the most important story of our battle against the spirit of this age.

    He’s at Askdrbrown and his radio show airs for two hours a day M-F. We need to unite as one as the Lord prayed we would! “Greater is He who is in us then he who is in the world!”

  2. Adam S.

    I just finished reading this lengthy essay this morning:

    http://www.profam.org/pub/fia/fia_1804.htm

    The author really drives home something similar to your 6th point. There are many juicy bits, but here’s one that’s especially quotable..

    It is in truth the cultural devaluation of marriage that explains why some homosexual activists have reacted to the recent push for homosexual marriage by asking, “Why should we scramble to get onto a sinking ship?”[60] But most of homosexual couples now seeking to be married are doing so precisely because so much of the traditional freight of marriage—complementary gender roles, work in a real home economy, childbearing, sexual fidelity, permanence—has been thrown overboard as the marital ship has settled ever lower in the water. The strangely de-natured and deracinated thing that marriage has become now appeals to homosexuals because it now offers insurance, employment, lifestyle, and government benefits, while imposing almost none of the obligations it once did….
    Thus commentators miss the point when they oppose homosexual marriage on the grounds that it “would undermine traditional understandings of marriage.”[62] It is only because traditional understandings of marriage have already been severely undermined that homosexuals are now laying claim to it. Carlin assesses the situation astutely when he asserts that “gay marriage is…worth opposing not as an end in itself…but [only] as the first step toward the rolling back of the progressive delegitimization of marriage that has occurred in the past few decades.” If it becomes merely a separate and discrete initiative, unconnected to the broader task of restoring substance to marriage, then Carlin judges the effort to outlaw homosexual marriage to be a “game…not worth the candle.” “If,” Carlin writes, “we are not interested in this rollback [of the delegitimization of marriage], we might as well permit gays and lesbians to marry.”[63]

  3. Tris Stock (@mygodlesslife)

    There is only one reason why you are losing on gay marriage; because you are wrong.

    1. I couldn’t care less, as a heterosexual man myself, about a ‘gay agenda’. The link you provided seems perfectly reasonable to me. If there is intolerance and bigotry in society regarding a particular way of life that does no one else any harm, it seems obvious that someone would put together some form of P.R. campaign to highlight acceptance of their right to self-determination. It is, I should imagine, no different than someone setting out the case for acceptance of civil rights for slaves, women and non-segregation. If it is acceptable for these movements to solidify their image in their plight against their oppressors, why should it be any different for GLBT or atheist groups?

    2. You are, indeed unequipped to use your own best weaponry. There are many powerful, love-centered, natural-law arguments against any form of “marriage”.

    3. It is true that the U.S. is generally impervious to good reasoning and poor educational standards. This is highlighted in the numerous studies that show a clear correlation between higher standards of education being synonymous with higher levels of organic atheism and a lower level of intolerance to GLBT issues.

    4. It is not ‘missiles’ you find hurled at you, but reason. Perhaps is is why it is thrown back half-spent.

    5.Same sex marriage is not a multi-generational experiment in gay “marriage”. It is about affording people the right to live in loving relationships on an equal footing with people of other sexual persuasions. How do you think the multi-generational experiment in slave, women’s and non-segregationist “rights” is going? And as I have already stated, you natural law argument is not without devastating consequences for marriage for anyone.

    6. I couldn’t agree more.

    7. It was the existing culture you say has been invaded, that your religion was responsible for. As such, you have every reason to be embarrassed with your involvement in a “culture war”. You are not, as you state, simply trying to stand your ground against a dangerously disruptive cultural ordnance, you are, in fact simply trying to stand your ground against a civic rights movement that in no wise can be said to be any more dangerous than any other rights movement.

    8. Why on earth would affording same sex marriage mean you would have to give up tax exemptions or jobs? I would say that is the most ludicrous argument against it I have ever heard, but then you continue. Reputations? Really? You think your reputation has anything to do with human or civic rights? I would love to hear that defended.

    9. You should be embarrassed to be ‘in it’. Your children’s spiritual, cultural, moral, and political health and safety are not in any danger from allowing equal rights to people.

    10. As I started this response, you are just wrong.

  4. Tom Gilson

    Tris,

    Obviously this is a contentious issue, and we all have strong opinions. It’s not news that people would disagree on it.

    I could respond to your points and make that the focus of this discussion—you actually misunderstood much of what I wrote—but that’s not what I intended with this blog post. It wasn’t a polemical piece arguing against gay “marriage,” and I don’t want to turn it into one.

    There will be other opportunities.

  5. Craig

    What if, like He did during Habakkuk’s time, God is raising up a group of non-Christians to discipline His kids? To teach us something of our own marriages and our own sin and disobedience toward Him? If that were the case, and I think that is what is happening here, then our fight against the larger “culture” would be a fight against our Father.

    I wouldn’t say that I’m “embarrassed” to be engaged in a “culture war”, Tom. I would just say that I refuse to take part. I’m sure you meant no offense but I have to admit that I was a bit taken aback by that item. I proudly wear on my sleeve my relationship with God and share my faith with my coworkers and family. If they want what I have, then they ask and I humbly and lovingly share and let the Holy Spirit do the rest. I don’t think it’s “unseemly” to be careful about how and why I’m sharing God’s Truths with non-believers. I won’t back down from my personal view, based on my understanding of the Bible, that homosexual activity is a sin, nor will I engage in conflict with a non-believer over it.

    If God chooses to raise up loving Christians to engage the larger culture and convince them that same-sex “marriage” is bad for our culture at large, as I believe it is, then so be it. And I gladly pray that will occur. But I don’t need to engage in “culture wars” to effect that change in public opinion.

    Besides, God’s Word and rules for His kids are not meant for non-believers. We are wrong to hold them to the same standard or to consider one sin more of an offense than another.

    If I err in logic or reasoning, then I’m confident I will be swiftly dealt with. 😉

  6. ordinary seeker

    The reason you are losing is that over time more and more gay people have begun to live openly and unashamedly, and as this has happened, more straight people have understood that gay people are people they love and respect–their brothers and sisters, friends, aunts and uncles, professionals and athletes and celebrities. And they don’t want these people whom they love and respect to be denied the rights that they have themselves. They see gay people as equals and want them to be treated as such.

    Your reason for not responding to Tris makes no sense to me. What is your point in this post, then?

  7. Tom Gilson

    The point of the post was in the title: “we.” It was not an us vs. them argument, but a message offered to those of us who share the belief that SSM is wrong.

  8. Tris Stock (@mygodlesslife)

    Tom, if you are going to post to a public blog which offers RSS subscriptions and comments, you should know better than to think your site is just for like minded folk or a place where you can place our musings unchallenged.

    I agree, though, that it is a contentious issue, which is exactly why people such as you and I write on the matter. Okay, so we are n different sides of the debate, but in refusing to confront my not unreasonable points against your position, you give the impression that you are not capable of defending them adequately. Now, you are a an eloquent type; I feel sure you could mangle some sort of defence should you wish to, but I fear in doing so you will have no choice but to either accept at least some of my points, or ‘out’ yourself as a fundamentalist bigot.

    Not one of your points is even vaguely compelling, and I would go far as to say that there no small whiff of nimbyism even though your own back yard is a fortified Christian cultural monolith into which GLBT people don’t want to be anyway.

    Your faith is your own, but so are people’s lifestyles their own. I have yet to see an argument for exactly how same sex marriage in any way harms either your faith or society.

    This, indeed, not an us and them argument. I am neither after all.

  9. Tom Gilson

    Tris,

    Tom, if you are going to post to a public blog which offers RSS subscriptions and comments, you should know better than to think your site is just for like minded folk or a place where you can place our musings unchallenged.

    I don’t recall reading a rule that says I have to create a private blog in order to deliver a message to an audience smaller than the entire Internet readership.

    Okay, so we are n different sides of the debate, but in refusing to confront my not unreasonable points against your position, you give the impression that you are not capable of defending them adequately.

    So sorry that you see it that way, but there is another reason I might not be answering you: it’s not my purpose to do so in this post.

    Now, you are a an eloquent type; I feel sure you could mangle some sort of defence should you wish to, but I fear in doing so you will have no choice but to either accept at least some of my points, or ‘out’ yourself as a fundamentalist bigot.

    Or, “heads I win, tails you lose.”

    Look, Tris, this post is an internal critique offered to people who share my general position. Courtesy would suggest that you let it be that. Thank you.

  10. Tom Gilson

    Craig,

    I’m not sure what your “refusal to take part” really means. Does it mean, for example (I’m sure it doesn’t, actually) not gearing up with explanations for the reasonability of biblical morality? Does it mean letting slogans and imagery rule opinion on this? Does it mean backing down on the truth for the sake of personal comfort?

    As I said, I know that’s not what you meant. I’m not sure what you did mean, though.

    If you look closely at the reasons I’ve given for where we are, do you think any of them would be the wrong kind of thing for us to address and act upon?

    I will say this: the language of “culture war” is fraught with a lot of meaning, not all of which I accept. I’m particularly unhappy with it when it’s fought the way it often is, by conservatives as well as liberals: on terms of sloganeering and imagery. There is a battle to be fought, but not in the world’s way.

  11. Andrew W

    Tom,

    I’ve been thinking, and I believe there’s another issue in this debate. It’s one Adam’s post touches upon.

    Ultimately, the well-argued case against “gay marriage” rests on the idea that the prime good of marriage is intimately connected to procreation and raising children. But if this is accepted, it strikes at the heart of not just “gay marriage” but much other sexual activity that is accepted, or at least tolerated, in modern society.

    For example, if child-rearing and marriage get wrapped up in the same package, then this compels a strong push-back against all forms extra-marital sex, as part of the rationale for limitations on sexual activity is to confine procreative activity to those already contracted to each other and ready to rear children.

  12. John Morgan

    I fear we as Christians have lost our saltiness as we succumbed to the pressures of the world in our churches. We’ve accepted much of the reasoning of the godless, which reasons with its foundation in the created rather than the creator.

    We’ve eschewed orthodoxy for that which makes us feel good. Yet the heart for which we’ve allowed ourselves to follow is deceitful. For what it has in empathy, it lacks in rationality. It is why we’re called to love God with our minds, bodies, and souls as well. Each compliments one another. Unfortunately, it takes effort — something we seem culturally to abhor in Western society, here in America especially.

    We’ve become the thing that Jesus and the Apostles warned against. We’ve lost our unity. If we want to win souls in any arena, I feel we must strive for unity first of all. We need to return to the time when the Christian body was one whole, when disagreements brought discussion amongst us, not division as it does now.

    This current “culture war” (as people seem to like to call it) with SSM is only one of many, yet it seems to be treated as the only one. As you’ve mentioned, we’ve watched the world make a mockery of marriage for the past several decades and instead of fighting the tide, we’ve rolled over with it and embraced it. It seems to be our modus operandi in modern society. I think we’re losing because we’ve been losing our saltiness with each capitulation.

  13. AgeOfReasonXXI

    we live in a culture that is impervious to good reasoning, having little education or experience with genuine critical thinking, and being accustomed instead to the manipulations of sloganeering and imagery.

    true that, just look at Christians 🙂

  14. Craig

    Generally, by refusing to take part, I mean that I refuse to take extra-Biblical marching orders about cultural issues I should think important. Let me be clear, I believe that sexual immorality, including homosexual activity is wrong – especially in the church. Cheating on your taxes or cheating your business partner are also wrong – especially in the church. Why aren’t we dealing with the latter as well and just as passionately? Why aren’t we dealing with divorce in the church as well and just as passionately?

    Outside of bringing His people to the Promised Land and then defending it from internal clans and enemies, please show me where, in the Bible, God raised up a group of His children to fight non-believers or outsiders to force His laws on them. How about in the New Testament and church age? All through captivity, God not only did NOT raise up His kids to fight invading and looting armies, He specifically instructed them, through the prophets, to obey Him and succumb to the authorities. Jesus famously told His followers to pay to Caeser what is Caeser’s – even though that meant supporting some of the most ruthless rulers and immoral governments in history. Previously, Daniel famously refused to eat the King’s food and he paid the price and the Lord delivered him and caused the King to give him political power. What Daniel DIDN’T do is try to force Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonians to follow Jewish customs and laws. He just asked for the right to follow his own religious dietary laws. In the same way, even if homosexual marriage is allowed in the US, churches should respectfully request of the state to be allowed to not perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. In fact, in California, a Democrat is moving legislation that would automatically exempt churches from being forced to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. That is what we should fight for.

    Habakkuk famously questioned God about His raising up the Babylonians to deal with His people. God’s response to Habakkuk’s questioning? I raised them up, I am God, I am dealing with you first, then I will deal with them. He did and He did.

    We should rest easy knowing the same God appears, again, to be raising up non-believers to deal with His kids. Let Him do what he must in teaching and disciplining “us”, His kids, and then we can have confidence in knowing He will deal with non-believers.

  15. Tom Gilson

    Cute, AORXXI.

    Disconnected from all sociological reality, gratuitous, and about as rhetorically effective as the schoolyard taunts it resembles more than anything else; but still cute.

  16. SteveK

    Craig,

    Cheating on your taxes or cheating your business partner are also wrong – especially in the church. Why aren’t we dealing with the latter as well and just as passionately?

    If a group of people constantly promoted the idea of cheating on your taxes to the point where it became a major topic of interest culturally and in the media, you can be sure churches would be dealing with it just as passionately.

    Churches put more water on the fires that are burning the hottest, and less on the areas that are just smoldering. Both need attention, but not the same kind of attention.

  17. Tom Gilson

    Something just occurred to me. Here is AgeOfReasonXXI quoting me and then responding:

    we live in a culture that is impervious to good reasoning, having little education or experience with genuine critical thinking, and being accustomed instead to the manipulations of sloganeering and imagery.

    true that, just look at Christians 🙂

    Anybody else besides me see the irony in that?

  18. Craig

    SteveK: I can tell you that my church – very much a Bible-teaching church – preaches on all sin equally. In fact, the underlying message of what I am saying is from what is taught in our church. It is inaccurate to say that all churches would or should take an active role in fighting a particular sin issue just because it is an issue in the larger culture. Highlight it – yes – but not fight it. There is a difference. I’ve sat in pews of churches that make abortion and homosexuality THE issues – ignoring other sins altogether. It’s wrong to make them THE issues, ignoring other sin like pride, which definitely is very prevalent in culture and the church.

    My point is that it doesn’t really matter how the larger culture wants to define life, marriage, property, etc. My church likes to say that “we live in the backwash of a fallen world.” How we deal with being in that backwash will define our actions and talk. What I’m seeing from a lot of Christians is that they are frustrated at being caught up in that backwash. I understand that frustration. I share it. Fortunately, there is hope. What matters is that we, as our Dad’s kids, are being obedient and bringing our sin and disobedience before Him, seeking His forgiveness, praying we may be a positive influence on those around us. If that leads to those around us changing their ways, praise be to God. And if that, then, leads to a larger change in culture, praise be to God again!

    But let’s not get distracted from changing our own lives first. Any talk of abortion or homosexuality or any other sin issue needs to begin with the church first and how the church needs to change in providing help and assistance and reaching out to those on the verge of getting an abortion, of acting upon same-sex urges, of cheating on their taxes, of dealing with their pride. The primary role of the church is to help the fatherless and widowed, not to fight a “culture war.” I know that’s NOT what Tom was implying with this post but I just thought that needed to be said.

  19. Tom Gilson

    Craig,

    SteveK’s answer to you makes good sense to me. The reason we’re not engaged in a vociferous public and political battle against economic cheating is because there’s no battle there. As for divorce, there is no strong voice out there shouting “Divorce is great! Divorce is a moral advance! Let’s legalize divorce!”

    I recognize there’s something of a different nature in that last sentence–“let’s legalize divorce!” Someone might say (and many SSM advocates have), “Why isn’t the church fighting against divorce? Aren’t you being inconsistent in your stand for marriage?”

    Well, yes and no. No-fault divorce slipped into our culture while the church was sleeping, and its effects have been, on the whole, very negative. That was a failure, a point of real inconsistency, on the part of the church.

    Sometimes it takes something more than a little problem to wake us up. That’s one of the messages of the prophets: if we don’t listen to a quiet word from God, he’ll raise his voice, metaphorically speaking, until we pay attention. So if we weren’t paying attention previously, that’s bad; but it’s no virtuous act of consistency to decide never to pay attention afterward.

    We could fight divorce now. We are fighting divorce now, at least we are in the circles I’m connected with. We’re fighting it through teaching, counseling, examples, encouragement, and every other feasible approach. We’re not fighting it politically because politically it would be a stupid battle to take up.

    As far as I’m concerned, same-sex “marriage” is a stupid battle to take up, too. But someone did it anyway: SSM advocates. They made it a battle. What were we supposed to do at that point?

    please show me where, in the Bible, God raised up a group of His children to fight non-believers or outsiders to force His laws on them.

    Force God’s laws on others? Where did you get that from? That’s a meme straight from the people shouting theocracy! theocracy!

    No. We’re not forcing anything. We’re engaged in the democratic process, just as are the people who are trying to push SSM on us.

    He specifically instructed them, through the prophets, to obey Him and succumb to the authorities.

    Are the gay-rights advocates then the authorities? No! This is a democracy. We’re the voters. Our friends and brothers and sisters and fellow church members and neighbors and restaurant owners and teachers and farmers are the voters. We decide. And we’re free to influence one another. Where in the Bible is that abjured? Where in the Bible do you see God saying we should not stand up and speak the truth to our culture?

    You use the word “force” three times in one paragraph. It’s not what we’re doing. It’s what our opponents accuse us of doing, but the charge is a false one, in view of our participating in exactly the same democratic processes as everyone else. In fact I would go so far as to label the charge a manipulative rhetorical maneuver on their part. I caution you to re-think what’s really going on here.

    Of course you are right to say that God uses ungodly cultures and peoples to discipline his own people. I don’t disagree with that for a moment. I think we need to change some of our ways. That was the point of this post, and it will be even more so in the one to follow it up.

  20. Tom Gilson

    Craig,

    As far as preaching goes (your first paragraph in #22) I agree, and in my experience, most churches do exactly what you say. The abortion and marriage battles are not being fought in the pulpit. Any wise pastor knows that his message needs to fit his audience, and for most church audiences on Sunday morning, there are many, many other issues to be covered.

    In the public square, however, it’s a different story. Gay “marriage” is out there, it’s a topic of live interest, and it’s entirely appropriate to speak to it with God’s truth.

    My point is that it doesn’t really matter how the larger culture wants to define life, marriage, property, etc. My church likes to say that “we live in the backwash of a fallen world.”

    I disagree whole-heartedly with this. I think your church is biblically in error. We are not living in backwash. We are living in God’s world, of which he has called us to be stewards. He has called us to live out our stewardship in righteousness.

    If we were under a totalitarian dictatorship I would agree with you more than I do, but we’re not. You and I are co-participants in the governance of our communities, states, and nation. If I as a co-participant refuse to speak truth into that area of my stewardship, I am in sin.

    With your closing paragraph I am in complete agreement. I don’t know about your experience, but mine has been that churches are actually trying to manage that comprehensive balance you urge upon us there. We’re trying to serve. We don’t have it down perfect yet, but God never said we had to be perfect in one area before we could be involved in the next.

  21. SteveK

    For what it’s worth, my church has not preached about homosexuality and/or gay “marriage” other than to read biblical text that may touch on the subject, but that wasn’t the reason for the message. So, to address Craig’s comment, we are not making a special issue out of this at all. Our focus is on strengthening God’s people and reaching out to our community, helping them and inviting them in. Last week we invited the community to join us on the front lawn for a free BBQ, and many came.

  22. Craig

    Tom: You make some good points. I think I have made some decent points too. The only thing I think needs a response is this:

    I disagree whole-heartedly with this. I think your church is biblically in error. We are not living in backwash.

    I’m sorry to hear that. Perhaps I did a poor job of explaining? I think what our pastors mean by saying that, and what I hoped would be conveyed in my use of it, is that we believers live in a world where those around us sin. Their sin affects us, whether they are believers or not. The guy speeding down the road that runs the stop sign and hits another car is the perfect example. Our sin and disobedience affects the people around us. There is no such thing as a private sin. Sure, there may be some sin that others don’t see and some that others do, but either way, our private and public sin affects others. Greatest example of this is Jonah. His private disobedience almost got non-believers killed. At the very least it caused valuable cargo to be thrown overboard and lost. No sense getting upset about it. Should we put resources fighting that fact?

    I suppose that’s what’s up for debate. Personally, I’d rather see time and resources spent reaching out, in love and humbleness and grace, to those who need a Savior – like you did at the Reason Rally. Unfortunately, what I have observed between believers and non-believers with regards to the SSM debate (just read the comments of any Christian Post article about the subject) is that there is finger pointing and fighting. It is quite shameful how some who call themselves believers behave when the subject is brought up. I fear that the rally cry you put out encourages a similar us vs. them mentality. I suppose that’s why I felt compelled to respond to this particular post the way I did. Equipping believers with info like you did with the non-Biblical reasons for traditional marriage series was great. And I appreciate the info you shared in that series. It’s definitely helped in conversations I’ve had with my relatives. But it’s different than rallying believers to engage in a “culture war”, which is what this post appears to be doing.

    SteveK: Right on. That’s exactly the kind of thing I’m talking about.

  23. Craig

    Oops, messed up the use of blockquote. I’m not particularly familiar with HTML coding. Hopefully, you and your readers can see where I meant to begin and end the blockquote.

  24. Tom Gilson

    And I appreciate what you’ve just shared. Thanks. I wasn’t trying to induce an us-vs.-them mentality, and if I did so inadvertently I regret it. What I was really trying to do was to acknowledge the fact that there is a culture war whether we want it or not, while rejecting the too-common view that we’re the ones who started it.

  25. Noah

    With the comment regarding no fault divorce and the church being asleep, I think that the church really wasn’t asleep or not looking at what was happening at the time. I think the church, by and large, said nothing because fighting against no fault divorces would be a fight against one’s self sorta speak, in that, many people in the church are able to take advantage of such law. I believe that the people love to fight against things that don’t really effect one’s self. Its easy for the church to fight against gay marriage because most of the church isn’t gay. Its easy for the church to fight against abortion because most people in the church don’t get abortions.

    Its not so easy to fight against no fault divorce when 50% of the people use it and take advantage of it, yet it is absolutely more destructive against institution of marriage that SSM ever would be.

    I am not sure about your comment…
    “people who are trying to push SSM on us.”

    I don’t think people are trying to push SSM on me or anyone else for that matter. Its like the folks who are trying to legalize marijuana. If it were to be legalized it wont bother me as I don’t use it nor am I even tempted to use it.

  26. Craig

    Noah: Are you a church-goer? Believer? Your comments lead me to believe you speak to many believers and church-goers frequently. Some I have spoken to have dealt with or are dealing with abortions and SS attraction, so I don’t know what kind of homogenous church you are a part of, but your comments ring hollow for me.

    As for divorce, I think there may be some accuracy in what you say but the statistic you cite includes those who are not really believers. Among the devout, not including loosely believing folks, that statistic declines significantly. Further, in a Bible-teaching church, such as mine, that promotes small group study and relationships, the struggles in marriage are prayed about and discussed and brought to counselors and church leaders, if needed. By no means is there any encouragement towards divorce just because it’s legal in civil law.

    Your equating SSM with marijuana is, I take it, a joke. Just because you don’t rob, cheat, steal, take drugs, engage in same-sex relationships doesn’t mean those things don’t or won’t affect you. Simple observations of life would make this obvious. For example: someone high on MJ causing an accident with your vehicle or a thief breaking into your car and stealing it.

    In my experience, and this was growing up in a very conservative part of NH, with homosexual friends in high school, homosexuals have been VERY pushy and have not hid their intentions in trying to convince others to “go gay.” I have never struggled with same-sex attraction so it was easy for me to cast their flirting aside and just be friendly with them. They were hardly the kind of victims that the larger homosexual agenda seems to enjoy casting them as. I don’t know if this experience is indicative of the larger homosexual culture, so I will resist the urge to draw larger conclusions.

  27. Logic

    The reason you are losing is …

    From the siteowner: The person (“Logic”) who posted the comment beginning with these words used an email address other than his or her own. I have two things to say to this person. First, you’ve misrepresented yourself here by using a false identity. I’m deleting your comment for that reason.

    Second, you picked the wrong address to fake. Not only does it belong to a real person, but it belongs to someone I’ve known since I met him at a conference a year or two ago, someone who is an Internet friend and apologetics colleague. I was quite sure he didn’t leave this comment, based on its content–but when I contacted him to check on it, I was certain.

  28. Herb

    The main reason the fight against gay marriage is lost is because in the states where it is allowed the longer it exists the more comfortable people are with it. Here in NH people now live side by side with gay couples and have begun to realize that these marriages have had a positive effect on their communities and the world has not come to an end like NOM had predicted. If gay marriage went to a vote here in NH,MA, or Vt it would win by a wide margin.

Comments close automatically after 120 days. Comment numbering may be incorrect due to a temporary bug.