Ten Ways Same-Sex Marriage and Civil Unions Deny Reality

For the biblical case against same-sex marriage, go here.

The above meme is KLM Royal Dutch Airlines’ attempt to affirm homosexuality during June — “pride month” — of 2017. The caption reads,

It doesn’t matter who you click with. Happy #PrideAmsterdam.

Read more about this attempt and its utter failure here.

The image is a perfect illustration of how a same-sex relationship never can be a marriage. It’s also a great introduction to a this list of ten ways same-sex “marriage” denies reality. The following, including the list, is taken from a previous Word Foundations article, which is available here.

Secularists have demanded that same-sex relationships be eligible for “marriage,” but the qualities of an authentic marriage are what they are precisely because an opposite-sex couple is involved. The term “same-sex marriage” is, quite simply, a myth. We might even call it a lie, because it is a contradiction in terms. In other words, Secular Humanism and its celebration of individualism and moral relativism under Obergefell reach conclusions that deny reality.

Here are ten. These items apply both to marriage and to so-called “civil-unions.”

Individual autonomy under Obergefell stands contrary to the clear teaching of nature regarding the biological differences between the sexes.
The conclusions of Obergefell’s worldview stand contrary to the clear relational dynamic that exists between opposite-sex couples. Put another way, same-sex marriage denies the importance of the mystery that always has been present—inherently—in heterosexual marriage. Because a man isn’t a woman and vice versa, each marital partner must work hard to understand, communicate with, and relate to his/her spouse. Such efforts strengthen a marriage. Same-sex marriage offers no such relational mystery. In fact, Secularism and same-sex marriage trample on this dynamic, effectively denying its importance and reality.
The worldview of Obergefell refuses to acknowledge the profound implications for marriage that flow from the fact that only a heterosexual couple can have a baby.
Secularism turns a deaf ear, not necessarily to a newborn’s helplessness, but to the implications of the baby’s helplessness. We must not forget that the baby would not have arrived were it not for a heterosexual union. Here we are not saying that homosexual parents of adopted infants neglect needs like feeding and changing them. We are saying that when both parents are of the same sex, this thwarts nature’s intention that the baby would have two opposite-sex parents once it is born. Put another way, same-sex marriage neglects the newborn’s innate needs for interacting with both a woman and a man—both a mother and a father. This is true not randomly, but in every case because same-sex marriage inherently denies children either a mother or a father.
Developing point #4 further, we observe that when society says a same-sex relationship can be a marriage, it effectively divorces from marriage and the family the natural, innate responsibilities that come with a sexual union that produces and rears children. I want to be abundantly clear on this point, because I’m not trying to say here that homosexuals are bad parents. Here’s what I am saying: The traits and realities of heterosexual marriage automatically designate who should have the primary responsibility for raising the children. Even though many and probably most homosexual parents in same-sex “marriages” love their adopted children and care for them sacrificially, the marital arrangement they are in does not set the stage for them to do this, because same-sex couples cannot procreate.
Despite Secularism’s claim that discrimination is to be abhorred, it actively discriminates against both men and women through same-sex marriage. Same-sex marriage assumes that neither a man nor a woman has any unique contribution to bring to the important task of parenting. In other words, it assumes that both men and women are disposable.
Through same-sex marriage, Secularism deprives children of the emotional balance that opposite-sex couples bring to parenting and to the family. The point here is that men and women are different, so a heterosexual couple provides an emotional balance for their children that same-sex couples cannot.
Secularism through same-sex marriage also denies children the balanced perspective on authority that they would receive from opposite-sex parents. Men and women lead, and discipline, differently. Children need from their parents both male and female approaches to authority and leadership.
The worldview of Obgerfell turns a deaf ear to civilization’s clear needs for the future.
Finally, secular humanism upholds homosexuality as being on par with heterosexuality. This denies the reality of the health risks inherent in homosexuality. The denial doesn’t change the reality, however. Indeed, it cannot.¹

These ten items represent the place to which Secularism, through Obergefell, has led us. The longer we stay here, the more we and future generations will be put at perilous risk. We must consistently and repeatedly warn of the dangers. Do not expect the average person on the street to recognize these perils on his or her own, because Secularism has a strong grip on culture.

For the biblical case against same-sex marriage, go here.

Note:

¹http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3105393/posts