Resources for Opposing Legalization of Same-sex Marriage

This is a page of various resources for use in the traditional marriage/same-sex marriage debate.

What is Marriage   - Ryan Anderson, Robert George,  and Sherif Girgis

The key question is what basis does government have to be involved in marriage? This is an excellent resource, probably the best single document. It not only sets forth the case for traditional marriage, it also answers many of the common arguments.

Free downloadable PDF

Book

Book summary by Amy Hall

Marriage/Divorce study

People who seriously practice a traditional religious faith—whether Christian or other—have a divorce rate markedly lower than the general population.

The factor making the most difference is religious commitment and practice.

What appears intuitive is true. Couples who regularly practice any combination of serious religious behaviors and attitudes—attend church nearly every week, read their bibles and spiritual materials regularly; pray privately and together; generally take their faith seriously, living not as perfect disciples, but serious disciples—enjoy significantly lower divorce rates than mere church members, the general public, and unbelievers….

W. Bradford Wilcox, a leading sociologist at the University of Virginia and director of the National Marriage Project, finds from his own analysis that "active conservative Protestants" who regularly attend church are 35 percent less likely to divorce compared to those who have no affiliation. Nominally attending conservative Protestants are 20 percent more likely to divorce, compared to secular Americans.

Setting the Record Straight: The Truth About HomosexualMarriage video (part 1)

Intro and case against Homosexuality from the Bible

Setting the Record Straight: The Truth About HomosexualMarriage video (part 2) 

Policy – the public case.

Answering Specific Same-sex Marriage Questions

How Can We Show Love to Homosexuals? (Video)

Is Denying Same-sex Marriage Like Denying InterracialMarriage? 

 

Race/Sex/Marriage

Should Homosexuals Be Allowed to Marry Whom They Love? 

Should Homosexual Couples Be Allowed to Adopt? 

Can Homosexuals Change Their Orientation? 

Is Homosexuality Just as Normal as Heterosexuality? 

Are Homosexuals Going to Hell? 

Does Homosexual Behavior in Animals Mean it's Natural forHumans? 

Is 10% of the Population Homosexual? 

Are Homosexuals Born that Way? 

Should Christians Impose Their Moral Standards on Society? 

Can You Have Gay Friends If You Think Homosexual Behavior Isa Sin? 

Does God Punish Gay People for Being Who They Are? 

Is Homosexuality the Worst Sin of All? 

Did Jesus Never Say Anything about Homosexuality? 

Answering a Case for Same-sex Marriage (Video) 

No Holding Back other forms of Marriage

If marriage is anything we want it to be, then it can be ANYTHING!

 

Other Resources 

Discussing Same-Sex Marriage (Audio) – "How do you make a reasonable argument against same-sex marriage rights? Greg answered that on a recent radio show."

Same-Sex Marriage Challenges and Responses – "Western civilization is shuddering under a tidal wave of activism in favor of same-sex marriage. Here is a careful response to their most compelling arguments."

Denying Same-sex Marriage Isn't Unequal Protection – "An Iowa court recently ruled in favor of six same-sex couples who claimed that denying them the right to marry violates the equal protection clause. This argument seems reasonable at first. Straight people can marry. Gays cannot. This is not equal protection. A little reflection, however, reveals how this view is mistaken.''
 

Judge Strikes Down Prop 8 – "Prop 8 makes a very rational classification on the basis of a relevant characteristic—that is, the gender of the participants. Men and women are different, and there's no getting around this. This fact has biological, emotional, psychological, and more ramifications when it comes to families and the creation and rearing of children. The fact is that both male and female are essential to marriage."
 

We're Arguing Definitions, Not Rights – "One common misconception in the same-sex marriage debate is the idea that the traditional legal definition of marriage is a violation of equal rights. Since this is an extremely emotionally charged accusation, it's difficult to get past it into a real discussion of the issue. Here's the approach I usually take…"
 

Liberal Support for Traditional Marriage – "This self-described liberal Democrat supports California's Proposition 8, which would constitutionally define marriage between one man and one woman because, as the piece so well explains, marriage, as a societal institution recognized by government, is about children."
 

Answering a Case for Same-Sex Marriage (Video) – Alan responds to Zach Wahls's video promoting same-sex marriage.

 

Stopping by the Woods on a Screaming Evening

I was recently asked the question, “How do you get someone involved in the pro-life cause when they do not see any reason to get involved?” Don’t think I did too great a job answering at the time, but, on reflection and with much thought, here is the answer I now have for that question.

First of all, this was asked in the context of pro-life training based on the outstanding DVD training material, Making Abortion Unthinkable: The Art of Pro-Life Persuasion, authored by Greg Koukl (Stand to Reason) and Scott Klusendorf (Life Training Institute). Mastering this material gives you both the scientific and the philosophical legs to stand against the pro-abortion position. One of the things it teaches is to simplify and focus the issue to the question, “What is the unborn?” If the unborn is just a blob of tissue then no reason at all is needed to kill it, BUT if it is a human being, then no reason for killing it is justifiable (with the exception where it is a clear medical choice between mother and baby dying or only aborting the baby will save the mother’s life).

One of my favorite tactics is to paint a word picture. Get the other person involved intellectually and emotionally. Get them to see the issue in their mind’s eye. You know the ending of the story – it must lead to the central issue, “What is the unborn?” and it must arrive there with both emotional and intellectual impact. So, this is an exercise of working backwards from the conclusion.

Here is my story. It is not the only one. You can construct your own.


You’re walking on a path through the woods when you are startled to hear what sounds like human screams. Instinctively, you turn to the direction of the screams, but you cannot see anything through the dense foliage. The screams continue.

What should you do? Investigate or just continue your casual walk admiring the beauty all around while ignoring the continuing screams?  Wait for an answer here.

So, you softly make your way to the sound, until parting some leaves you see an adult brutally abusing a small toddler.

What do you do now? Try to intervene, call for help on your cell phone, run for help, or refuse to get involved?  Again, wait for an answer.

What would you think of a person who simply said, “I don’t want to get involved,” turned back to the path, and continued their pleasant stroll through the beautiful woods – all the while ignoring the screams?

Is not some form of action to help the human response to this situation? Don’t we have a natural revulsion for the moral integrity of the person who does nothing?

That is the picture of the abortion holocaust happening in this country and around the world.

I’m not sure there’s much more to do for the person whose response remains, “I don’t want to get involved.” But, if the story seems to hit home, and they try to make a point of the difference between the toddler being abused and a fetus being killed in abortion, then, you’ve got your opening to say, “but that’s the real issue isn’t it? What is the unborn?”

That’s where the training kicks in. You now have the open door for the scientific and the moral case ready. And, you’re ready for the other common objections.

Virus In the Garden

I have started "debating" atheists and others on Facebook. It is taxing, emotionally and intellectually, but I enjoy the fact that it forces me to think and organize my thoughts much better. Recently, I responded to a post of this quote by Ron Patterson - "In the Bible we are asked to believe that the entire human race was plunged into sin because one woman took the advice of a talking snake... before she had any knowledge of good and evil." I want to share part of my answers to this issue.

 Adam and Eve's sin was disobedience. Lacking knowledge of good and evil has nothing to do with it. In fact, they already had knowledge of good from walking with God and having all good things provided for them. 

They also knew, again from walking with God, that they were not God - that there was a significant difference between their abilities and His. For example, God created; Adam got to name. 

The temptation to be as God was an obvious falsehood they would have known to reject. 

 God knows the highest expression of Good - Himself - and the absolute pit of evil that exists where He is not, but God also has the ability to know all these things without being corrupted by the knowledge in any way. He has the omnipotence and omniscience to ensure His plan always works out in the way that brings the greatest good (His Glory) before mankind. 

 Adam and Eve were created as moral creatures - similar to God's moral nature - else they could not have known God as Good, but they did not have God's power to not be corrupted by this knowledge. For them, the fruit of the forbidden tree was a virus. 

Squirrels get all the peaches off the trees at my lake house. If a squirrel had eaten the forbidden fruit in the Garden, God would not have cared.  They have no thought of being God.

Legalizing Wrong as Right Sends More to Hell

Pain has a purpose - to let us know something is wrong and give us a chance to do something about it. 

The social pain of disapproval serves the same purpose. When social disapproval is inline with God's Word, that pain has a greater possibility of leading people to examine their contrary beliefs/behavior and turn back to the right path - repent. 

Giving the legal permission to do what is wrong salves over the conscience and allows the lost a greater comfort in their wrong doing. Whether it is legalization of abortion, sexual deviancy, or any other of a myriad of things the Bible is abundantly clear is wrong, legalization has the effect of sending more people to hell. Or, at the very least, prolonging their self-deception until they finally come to the end of themselves and reach out for God but still suffer the natural consequences of the much deeper hole they are in because of the comfort of legalization. 

 This is not a trivial matter - it is grave, immediate, and important. We should be saying to those we've elected, "How dare you vote contrary to God's Word!"