There are several reasons every healthy society should stand against bills that allow for civil unions or same sex marriage. The job of the government is to protect a society from destructive forces that are harmful to the state. The state is responsible to create and enforce laws that protect individuals and communities from self-destructive behavior and research has shown that the gay lifestyle is a dangerous lifestyle with harmful consequences for any society.
The Gay Lifestyle
First, homosexuals are much less monogamous and much more promiscuous. Several studies foundshocking results.
• In the classic study by Bell and Weinberg, they found that 43% percent of white male homosexualshad sex with 500 or more partners and 28% having 1000 or more partners.1
• A New England Journal of Medicine study revealed a gay man has 106 partners a year.2
Even gays in a “committed relationship” were discovered to have multiple sex partners. The definition of monogamy differed from the common definition. Monogamous relationships are those which lasted no more than nine months and almost never more than five years.
• Bell and Weinberg revealed that only 14% of gay males and 40% of lesbians were living in “monogamous” relationships.
• A Dutch study of “partnered” homosexuals, published in the journal, AIDS, found that men with partner nevertheless had an average of eight sexual partners per year.3
• Gay activist Andrew Sullivan states “The truth is, homosexuals are not entirely normal; and to flatten their varied and complicated lives into a single, moralistic model is to miss what is essential and exhilarating about their otherness.”4 As a result of this lifestyle, the rate of STDs is extremely high within the gay community.
• CDC reported that almost half of male patients with syphilis were involved in homosexual or bisexual contact even though homosexuals make up a small percentage of the population.5
• Homosexuals account for 80% of America’s most serious STDs.6
• Youths who engage in homosexual behavior are 22 times more likely to contract an STD than heterosexual youths.7
• A study of 15,565 gay men has determined that, independent of HIV infection, homosexual men are 24 times more apt to get anal cancer than men in the general population.8
Engaging in homosexual acts of sex is very destructive to the body. An article in the Annals of Internal Medicine listed over 15 severe injuries, diseases, or syndromes associated with oral and anal sex. The list includes rectal tearing, incontinence, diarrhea, hepatitis A and B, and more.9
Studies have shown that the life expectancy of men and women involved in the gay lifestyle is much shorter than those of heterosexual individuals.
• Life expectancy at 20 years of age for a gay man is 8-20 years less.10
• Half of gay and bi-sexual men will not see their 65th birthday.11
• The average life expectancy of a man in the homosexual lifestyle is 41 years; with AIDS factored in, the age is reduced to 39.12
Not only are their medical and physical consequences but there are also economic consequences as well. Granting same sex couples the same rights and heterosexual couples will have a major economic impact. One example is that of insurance. Due to the diseases and physical ailments that proliferate in the gay community there will be a dramatic increase in medical costs. Requiring companies and governmental agencies to grant medical insurance to same sex couples will increase the cost of medical care and the premiums of medical insurance. This increase will be paid by businesses all tax payers. The increase in costs would become crippling.
Redefining Marriage and the Family
Perhaps the most dangerous part of this debate is the redefining of marriage and the family. Marriage has always been defined as a man and woman in a committed domestic and sexual relationship. No human society has ever embraced same sex marriage. It is not a part of any human culture.13 No society has ever allowed people to choose to live in whatever relationship worked for them. All societies need people to live within the specific parameters of traditional marriage. Research has shown that traditional marriages are healthier for individuals and societies.
• Married people on average live up to eight years longer.
• Married people suffer less from long-term illnesses than those unmarried.
• Married people are less likely to engage in unhealthy behaviors such as drug or alcohol abuse.
• Married people have twice the amount of sex and have greater levels of satisfaction.14
Children in traditional families are also healthier. Research shows they are less likely to…
• Suffer serious child abuse
• End up in jail as adults
• Be depressed adolescents
• Be expelled from school
• Have developmental problems
• Use drugs
• Be sexually active 15
Marriage provides the context for an adult man and woman to regulate sexual life and provide for the needs of daily life. Wives help men channel their sexual energy in socially productive and non-predatory ways. Husbands protect women from exploitation of other males. Marriage ensures children have the benefit of mother and father learning the importance of each gender and how they fulfill unique roles in distinctive ways. Traditional marriage is the foundation for all healthy societies and we redefine marriage at our own peril. Nature has always had a narrow definition of marriage. Healthy societies do not allow a man to marry a minor or multiple wives or an animal. The redefining of marriage leads to the slippery slope of allowing various forms of marital arrangements foreign to civilized societies.
The Christian Response
The Christian community believes that God has established universal laws that reflect His character and are the foundation of a healthy society.
We love our state and country and seek to support laws that are just and protect our nation from destructive behavior and forces that would harm a healthy society.
• We stand for the defense of the traditional and biblical definition of marriage which form the foundation of any healthy society and are opposed to same sex unions which are destructive to any society and are a violation of biblical teachings.
• We love those is the gay community and are committed to their well-being. This means we are committed to helping them exit this dangerous lifestyle.
It is our hope that state lawmakers will seriously review the reasons we stand for traditional marriage and are opposed to same sex unions. Marriage and the family unit are the oldest institutions created by God and therefore, must be protected if our state and nation are to remain a healthy and prosperous society.
- Alan Bell, Martin Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), 308-309.
- T.C. Quin, New England Journal of Medicine, Sept. 8, 1983, 576-83.
- Maria Xiridou, et. al., “The contribution of steady and casual partnership to the incidence of HIV infection among homosexual men in Amsterdam,” AIDS, 17 (2003): 1031.
- Andrew Sullivan, Virtually Normal (New York: Vintage Press, 1996), 202-3.
- Ibid., 170-3.
- HIV/AIDS Surveillance Report (Atlanta: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention 1993), 13, quoted in Kerby Anderson, A Biblical View on Homosexuality (Eugene: OR.: Harvest House Publishers, 2008), 26.
- AMA profiles of adolescent health series, America’s Adolescents: How Healthy Are They? (Chicago: The American Medical Association, 1990), 31.
- Dr. Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute, Family Report, January-February 1997, p. 2,Website: http://www.familyresearchinst.org
- N.E. Reiner, F.N. Judson, W.W. Bond, D.P. Francis, and N.J. Peterson, “Asymptomatic rectal mucosallesions and hepatitis B surface antigen at sites of sexual contact in homosexual men with persistent hepatitis B virus infection,” Annals of Internal Medicine, 1984), 170-3.
- Robert S. Hogg et al., “Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men, “International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657.
- Ibid., 657.
- Dr. Paul Cameron of the Family Research Institute, P.O. Box 62640, Colorado Springs, Colorado 80962-2640. Website: http://www.familyresearchinst.org
- Glen Stanton & Bill Maier, Marriage on Trial (Downers Grove, IL.: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 47-52.
- Linda Waite and Maggie Gallagher, The Case for Marriage (New York: Doubleday, 2000).
- Patrick Fagan, “The Positive Effects of Marriage: Economic Effects of Marriage on Children,” The Heritage Foundation, http://www.heritage.org/Research/Features Marriage/children.cfm.