Gay marriage is already legal in 11 countries[1]. In school districts all over Canada and in parts of the U.S. books like Heather has Two Mommies are as common as See Spot Run was to previous generations.2

It is no longer adequate for Christians to say, "The Bible says homosexuality is wrong. I believe it, and that settles it." There are critics today who say that Moses and other Bible writers had no concept of committed same-sex relationships as we understand them today. They claim that the Bible writers were condemning only promiscuous, temporary liaisons where heterosexuals engaged in same-sex behavior for sheer thrills or to demonstrate dominance over a weaker person.[3]

Whether we like it or not, the topic of homosexuality is no longer taboo. Nor is it deemed simply unacceptable for polite conversation. Indeed, Christians find themselves increasingly in the middle of an ongoing debate about homosexuality, and most specifically gay marriage. To be a part of this conversation requires honesty and compassion and also knowledge of the facts.

So here, for discussion, are some talking points around ten modern myths about gay marriage. They address arguments frequently used in debate. If America proceeds with the legalization of same-sex marriages, it must do so with its eyes open. However, if these can be seen as genuine myths, then it is possible that the broad-based international movement for gay marriage could topple like a house of cards.

MYTH #1
To be against gay marriage is to be a hate-filled bigot

If this were true then those who change their minds about gay marriage were hate-filled bigots before the change. For example, President Obama once opposed gay marriage. Does this mean that during that time he was a hate-filled bigot? As most people know, assigning ill intentions to those with whom one disagrees goes both ways. It is a common human failing to project bad motives onto those with whom one strongly disagrees. Therefore, it is just as possible that those who promote gay marriage are as bigoted (or not) as those who oppose it. As with all arguments about motive, this one tends to go both ways.

MYTH #2
Gay people should have the same civil rights as straight people

Currently the right to civil unions virtually guarantees the same legal rights to gay people as marriage does. What is at stake in the push for gay marriage is not therefore legal protection, but moral acceptance. The goal is to gain the same moral acceptance assigned to committed gay people as to married people by coaxing the public to accept gay marriage as the moral equivalent of heterosexual marriage. For this to happen a new definition of marriage is needed. However, it should be remembered that no society in history, even those where homosexual behavior was celebrated (as in ancient Greece), ever broadened the word "marriage" to include gay commitments.

MYTH #3
Marriage is simply a legal contract between two people

The facts are otherwise. Marriage has been seen through the ages, and by virtually all cultures, as a social institution providing certain goods and furthering certain aims. Most importantly among those social goods is the furtherance of the human race and the protection and nurture of children. Not all couples can have children, and some for a variety of reasons do not wish to have them. Moreover, some argue that there are already too many children on the planet. But this does not change the fact that the institution of marriage itself has almost always implied an openness to children when conception is possible. Also, the complementarity of the two sexes in marriage provides children with an understanding of the differences between maleness and femaleness even when, over time, the distinct roles of men and women have changed.

MYTH #4
Children raised by same-sex parents do not suffer any discernible deprivation

Again, the facts seem to be otherwise. There have been very few studies done where significant numbers of children raised by same-sex parents have been compared to similar numbers of children raised by opposite-sex parents. Most of the studies promoted by pro-gay-marriage advocates are of very small samples. Anyone can cite anecdotal evidence of happy well-adjusted same-sex raised children versus unhappy maladjusted opposite-sex raised children. Until the broader studies are done, common sense thinking would indicate that boys need a father in the home and a mother, and girls need a mother in the home as well as well as a father.[4] We already know from very broad studies that despite the herculean efforts of single parents to raise children, those raised by only one parent begin life with a variety of handicaps. We simply do not yet know whether the same would apply to children raised by two parents of the same sex,

MYTH #5
The acceptance of gay marriage will not influence impressionable young people's sexual orientation

Despite the popular notion that there is such a thing as a "gay gene", which would then mean that sexual orientation is inborn, no serious scientific studies confirm that hypothesis.[5] The age-old nature vs. nurture debate rages on in the social sciences, and few if any scientists are willing to say that behavior (or orientation) is solely the result of one of these vs. the other. Nearly all behavior is influenced by both heredity and environment. It is therefore premature to say that an adolescent growing up in a culture where homosexual behavior is tolerated and celebrated (as in gay marriage) will not be encouraged to experiment with same-sex activity. The question of whether sexual orientation, once fixed, can be changed is not the point here, and is a subject for ongoing debate. For example, Alan Chambers, the Executive Director of Exodus, the largest and best-known "ex-gay" ministry has admitted that in the vast majority of cases, their work does not change orientation but rather imparts coping mechanisms allowing the trainee to adopt outwardly "straight" behavior while not altering their same-sex attraction. However, other authorities cite more hopeful statistics.

MYTH #6
Gay marriage demonstrates the same kind of loving commitment as heterosexual marriage

Unquestionably, committed gay and lesbian couples love each other. No one need question in principle the caring, tender, and generous nature of that love. But there is a difference that needs to be noted, and it goes to the heart of the current debate. Here one needs to talk percentages. While adultery does occur in many heterosexual marriages, rarely are these marriages "open" to multiple sexual partners. However, surveys have shown that 95% of homosexual partnerships are intentionally "open" so that outside sexual liaisons are permitted. Moreover, the duration of homosexual partnerships is significantly shorter when compared to heterosexual marriages. Nor can it be demonstrated that by making these homosexual partnerships into "marriages" they will last longer. Where homosexual marriage presently is legal, the same shorter duration seems to be the norm.[6]

MYTH #7
There is nothing unsafe or unhealthy about gay sex

Again, the facts belie this. Can one honestly say that the human body was made for anal penetration? Not only are latex barriers not 100% safe in protecting from sexually transmitted diseases such as HIV, but the lining of the intestinal tract is thinner than that of the vagina and penetration exposes it to the intrusion of a wide variety of bacterial infections from ones own body as well as from another's. Homosexuals have shorter life expectancy than heterosexuals, and infections are one reason why.[7]

MYTH #8
Gay marriage will not open the door to plural marriage or polygamy

There are reasons to think that it could. If gay marriage is promoted on the basis of innate human rights, as it currently is, there is no way that the same arguments will not promote both polygamy and plural marriage. Polygamy is where a husband has more than one wife, and plural marriage is where two or more couples openly share a committed sexual relationship. As Jewish writer Dennis Prager has argued, the "sexual revolution" initiated by the ancient Hebrews in which one man was to be committed to one woman -- a revolution that was continued, of course, by Christianity -- elevated women from being mere wombs to being persons worthy of dignity, respect, and protection. It is hard to imagine how polygamy or plural marriage would ensure those same safeguards. We know that in countries where polygamy is legal they do not. Already the voices of poly advocates and practitioners are being heard in the media and in academic and legal circles.

MYTH #9
Divergent views about sexual behavior and the nature of marriage will continue to be respected

Unfortunately, if gay marriage becomes the new orthodoxy the right to open dissent will likely be restricted. In those countries where gay marriage has become legal, open dissent is already considered hate speech and open to prosecution. Free speech is presently restricted in many parts of the world on a wide variety of subjects, most notably religion. The same boundaries are sure to be erected around the new "right" of same-sex marriage - most probably by the state, and concurrently by denominational leadership. One wonders if the ultimate goal of those who promote gay marriage is not to render all forms of non-exploitative sex to be above public censure.

MYTH #10
Churches and clergy will be exempt from performing gay marriages

If sexual orientation (and by extension practice) comes to be viewed as similar to skin color, in other words as innate, then it's hard to imagine clergy and churches being allowed to abstain from performing gay marriages for very long. Can one imagine, for example, a clergyman today refusing to perform an interracial marriage? Despite assurances to the contrary, it is unlikely that churches will be exempt once gay marriage is enshrined as a basic human right.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden. Bills pending legalization are proposed or pending in 8 other countries including the U.K.

[2] By Leslea Newman, Diana Souza (illustrator), 1989. A 2010 film "The Kids are All Right" is comedy about a boy who has two mommies and four dads.

[3] See The Bible and Homosexual Practice, Robert A. J. Gagnon, Nashville, Abingdon, 2001. The entire text is relevant, but especially pages 229-394. Gagnon argues that the biblical writers had a broader understanding of homosexual practice than some modern writers claim.

[4] 77% of the 59 same-sex parenting studies used by the American Psychiatric Association to conclude that "children of same-sex parents are not disadvantaged in any significant respect relative to children of heterosexual parents" were based on non-representative, small, volunteer or convenience samples, according to Loren Marks of Louisiana State University. (2012) For a summary of Marx' research, see "Same Sex Science", First Things, February 2012, pp.27-33. Marks observes that the effects of same-sex parenting are often not ideally observable until mid-late adolescence or early adulthood. It is significant to note that none of the APA studies actually addressed longer-term outcomes. See also the results of a study by Mark Regnerus, Associate Professor of Sociology at the University of Texas at Austin. His extensive study of young American adults (ages 18-39) who were raised in different types of family arrangements, including those raised by same-sex parents, revealed numerous, consistent differences, especially between the children of women who have had a lesbian relationship versus those raises by still-married (heterosexual) biological parents. Social Science Research, Vol. 41, Issue 4, July 2012, pp. 752-770. The University of Chicago study of children raised by single parents is most revealing, especially for boys. See The Telegraph, January 3, 2012.

[5] In 1993, scientist Dean Hamer claimed to find a "gay gene." His group consisted of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers who had a high incidence of homosexual relatives on the maternal side of the family. There was no control group. A second study by Hamer in 1995 showed even less correlation between genetics and sexual orientation. He eventually concluded "We have not found the gene -- which we don't think exists -- for sexual orientation." "There will never be a test that will say for certain whether a child will be gay. We know that for certain." Nature Genetics 11 (1995): 248-56. Reported in Gagnon, op cit.p.400.

[6] In The Male Couple (1984) McWhirter and Mattison, both medical doctors, studied 156 male couples. While most expected sexual fidelity, 95% had an arrangement whereby the partners may have sexual activity with others. A 2010 study by Spears and Lowen surveyed the experience of 86 non-monogamous same-sex couples over a four-year period. Couples chosen had been in their relationships between 8 to 42 years. 48% were either "open" or "slightly open." Of the remaining couples, 42% opened their relationships over time. There seemed to be a positive correlation between longevity and non-monogamy. The authors of the study were reluctant to publicly address the issue of non-monogamy, fearing that bringing this issue to the public attention might jeopardize the push for gay marriage. Blake Spears & Lanz Lowen, "Beyond Monogamy: Lessons from long-Term Male Couples in non-monogamous relationships". The Couples Study: www.thecouplesstudy.com. For a survey of other studies giving essentially the same results, see "Is there a Case for Same-Sex Marriage?" R.S. Harris, Anglican Mainstream, 2012.

[7] Dr. Paul Cameron in a 2007 paper given to the Eastern Psychiatric Association entitled "The Homosexual Lifespan", having studied the obituary columns of the Washington Post and The Oregonian, concluded that the life expectancy of 73% heterosexual men and 80% of heterosexual women was age 65. However, in his study of 6,383 death notices from 16 newspapers and journals published by the homosexual community over an 8 year period, the life expectancy of homosexual men was 42, and only 9% lived to be 65. The lesbian life expectancy was age 46 and only 24% reached age 65. Critics have argued that obituaries in gay-themed newspapers do not provide a representative sample of deaths, and the Southern Poverty Law Center has classified Cameron's "Family Research Institute" as a hate group.

Peter Moore is the Dean/President Emeritus of Trinity School for Ministry in Ambridge, PA, and currently serves as the Associate for Discipleship at St. Michael's Church, Charleston, SC. Previously he was rector of Little Trinity Church, Toronto, and founder and director of FOCUS, a ministry to independent secondary schools up and down the Eastern Seaboard of the US. Other writings by him may be found at his website:www.astepfurtherdiscipleship.com