My impassioned response to this idiot: http://www.americancivilization.net/articles/2006/Marriage_ABCs.htm
In defense of your views that the fragile institution of marriage needs constitutional protection from monogamous homosexuals who share your views on the value of familial commitments, you bring up the point that adultery, incest, homosexuality, and bestiality are punishable offenses in the KJ Bible. While it is true that those acts were punished, it is also true that many many other acts punished in the Bible go unpunished today. Onanism isn’t against the law and is rampant. Where is your outrage? Premarital sex between a man and a woman was punished frequently and harshly, more frequently than homosexuality is even mentioned, in fact. Is there a Defense of Chastity act in the works? Divorce, the commonly accepted true threat to the sanctity of marriage, was illegal in the Bible, yet curiously absent from any proposed constitutional amendments.
On the other side of your duplicitous coin, in the Bible we have acts that go unpunished — or were minimally addressed with relative wrist slappings such as rape and the maiming or murder of a servant — that today are deserving targets of moral outrage: revenge killings, murder in the name of God, violent sexual agression, pedophilia, slavery, prostitution, polygamy, and treachery against ones own government. Shall we repeal laws for things the Bible didn’t see fit to punish us for? Why conservatives have jumped on the homosexual threat to the “sanctity of marriage” as the target of their righteous indignation when there are so many other, more offensive biblical evils eludes me.
In your article, you ask for solid arguments from liberals challenging your views, yet you offer no evidence that your views are correct. It’s hard to challenge an unsupported view. That’s why most Christians argue their faith rather than their beliefs. By definition, faith defies reason and is therefore above challenge. Furthermore, many Christians will make biblical arguments for their views, but when challenged on the accuracy, veracity, or consistency of the Bible, they have little to offer except their faith that it is the word of God.
Your apparent argument is that homosexual unions will harm the sanctity of marriage. Where is your proof? Do you have statistics that show a decline in loyalty between married men and women who live in a state where homosexual marriage is legally recognized? I truly doubt it.
Now, there is nothing wrong with faith, but any serious discourse on a controversial subject should be had without the hindrance of one or both sides challenging the others’ faith. But absent such arguments, your point of view falls on its knees.
Therefore, I would like to propose that perhaps the problem you have with homosexuality is deeper and more complex than simply your faith in the teachings of the Bible and your belief that legislation should be built upon it. Could it be that you yourself are finding it hard to resist your homosexual tendencies and assume that all of us share your need for government controls in order to overcome the temptations you are having such a problem with?
Your unfounded fears that homosexual unions are a threat to the institution of marriage could likely be a misinterpretation of a more sensible fear: that the security you find in identifying with the mainstream and being a part of the majority will be shaken if you are free to explore a part of yourself that you don’t fully understand, especially something as stunted and vulnerable as your repressed sexuality.
So I’ll now attempt to ease your mind regarding just a couple of the many worries our society has thrust upon your fragile belief structure. First, let me assure you that men and women will always be in the majority of married couples. No matter how free homosexual couples are to express their love, devotion, and affection for one another, men will always be interested in women and vice versa.
Second, same sex marriage will always be frowned upon by certain churches and other open membership religious organizations and the term Holy Matrimony will always have its stalwarts who will allow it to be applied only to the unions of which they approve. People love their dogma and self-righteous disgust with others’ freedoms and will always find a way to hold their self-opinion high at the expense of others.
Finally, Mr. Bowden, with that understanding, face your fear. Explore your sexuality with impunity. Of course, be safe. Wear a condom if you find yourself in a passionately charged embrace with a man called “Bear”. But I recommend you take it slowly. Don’t hit the leather bars on your first night. Stick to social gatherings with people you know. Attend a gay book club. Smile at pretty boys. Wink, even.