Cons of Same Sex Marriage

Cons of Same Sex Marriage

 
You are here: Love >> Cons of Same Sex Marriage

This is "Same Sex Marriage Countries," the third part of point four in a six point case regarding the same-sex marriage debate. The case is outlined here.

Cons of Same Sex Marriage - It hurts Heterosexuals
Homosexual activists ask, “How would government-backed same-sex marriage hurt you?” Most conservatives have failed to answer this question, but it is not hard to foresee the following negative consequences on all Americans:

  1. Income taxes will be increased to make up for the marriage tax benefits given to homosexual couples and to pay for the social costs resulting from the increase in illegitimacy. We provide financial benefits to married couples because they produce and care for children. Why should homosexual couples get the same benefits as men and women raising children? Moreover, providing financial incentives for homosexual unions would be doubly counterproductive. First, taxpayers would be subsidizing, and thus encouraging destructive behavior. Second, we then would pay for the results of that behavior in the form of increased medical and social costs.

  2. Social security taxes will be increased (or benefits decreased) in order to pay survivor support benefits to homosexual “widows” and “widowers.”

  3. Medical insurance premiums will rise to offset the higher health care costs associated with homosexual behavior (i.e., AIDS, colon cancer, hepatitis and other diseases) which will likely increase if we approve same-sex marriage. Medical premiums would rise further if insurance companies are mandated to cover fertility treatments for lesbian couples (there’s sure to be some judge somewhere to order that!).

  4. Employee benefits will be reduced as employers are mandated to spread their limited benefit dollars to include homosexual partners. Limited benefit dollars given to homosexuals must come from somewhere; indeed, they are taken away from everyone else—married couples raising children.

  5. Homosexual couples will be given legal preference to adopt due to their inability to procreate. In other words, homosexuals will not be granted equal rights but super rights—rights that will supersede your rights as a citizen. Tragically, children will be treated as trophies that, in effect, validate homosexual relationships.

  6. Your children will be indoctrinated, with or without your consent, to accept homosexual behavior and same-sex marriage as the moral and social equivalent of heterosexual behavior and marriage (we are seeing this in our public schools already, especially in California and Massachusetts).

  7. Your workplace will attempt to indoctrinate you to the same ends—and if you refuse, you will either lose your job or not be considered a “team player.” (This is already happening through “diversity” training in many companies; it will become universal if same-sex marriage becomes law.)

  8. Your place of worship will be forced to hire homosexuals and play by new draconian rules that impose homosexuality. A Catholic adoption charity recently closed its doors in Massachusetts rather than offer children to homosexual couples as the state mandated. This new rule was the direct result of government-backed same-sex marriage. Tolerance will become a one-way street—you need to tolerate and even advance homosexuality, but homosexual activists don’t need to tolerate your views.

  9. Free speech and religion rights will be curtailed as opposition to homosexuality is criminalized as “hate speech” (as is now the case in Canada and Sweden). This should wake up religious people who erroneously believe they ought not to be involved in politics. Politics affects your ability to practice your religion! Once same-sex marriage is approved, it will not be long before you will be fined or imprisoned for expressing any opposition to homosexuality. People with religious moral convictions will be considered worse than racists.

  10. Your government and its intrusive ways will grow as a result of the changes we have just reviewed. That’s another reason why liberals love same-sex marriage—it means more big government. They will call for more government programs to fix the mess caused by the destruction of the family and more government regulation to ensure that their new morality of political correctness is imposed on you, your children, and your place of worship.
These negative effects are indeed significant, but as we have seen, the most dramatic impact will come upon future generations. That’s because same-sex marriage will change the way future generations think about homosexuality and marriage itself. Ironically, this would also hurt homosexuals.

Cons of Same Sex Marriage - It hurts Heterosexuals
For more than two hundred years of our country’s history, homosexual behavior was considered bad enough to prohibit as evidenced by the many state laws against sodomy. When the Supreme Court nullified those laws in the 2003 Lawrence vs. Texas decision, it sent a message that suddenly homosexual behavior was not bad enough to prohibit—now we must permit it.

That is a significant paradigm shift, but it’s nothing compared to the complete reversal of thought that the imposition of same-sex marriage would represent. If the court or congress mandates same-sex marriage, it will be in effect saying that sodomy is now good enough to promote—from prohibit, to permit, to promote. Same-sex marriage would promote the obviously false idea that homosexual behavior is just as healthy and beneficial as heterosexual behavior. This would not only hurt society, but it would hurt homosexuals as well. How so?

Given the serious health consequences of homosexual behavior, we would be unloving as a society to endorse it. We would not be merely allowing people to destroy themselves, but we would be encouraging them to do so.

David Kupelian writes this well in his book, The Marketing of Evil:

“We’ve forgotten as a society what love is, because supporting and justifying homosexuality is not real love any more than glorifying drinking helps the alcoholic or celebrating smoking helps wipe out lung cancer . . . The most loving stance for others to take is not to serve as enablers of self-destructive and immoral compulsions, but to stand in patient but firm opposition.”60

Why don’t we stand in patient but firm opposition? Because it’s much easier to uncritically accept the half-truths put out by homosexual activists, and then have what seems to be compassion for them by giving them what they want. But that’s not real compassion. Jay Budziszewski observes that real “compassion ought to make us visit the prisoner, dry out the alcoholic, help the pregnant girl prepare for the baby, and encourage the young homosexual to live chastely. But how much easier it is to forget the prisoner; give the drunk a drink, send the girl to the abortionist, and tell the kid to just give in. False compassion is a great deal less work than true.”61

People are being hurt by our false compassion that promotes homosexuality. Such false compassion not only entices more young adults to experiment with homosexuality, but makes the struggle more difficult for homosexuals who would like to leave the lifestyle. As George Gilder points out, “Some gays . . . are not helped by the aggressive gay liberation movement that wants to flush them out of the closet and into the street where they can be exploited by the gay rights brigade. They want to live quietly and productively and are thoughtful enough not to want to inflict their problem on others.”62 Indeed, promoting problem behaviors is anything but compassionate.

Homosexual activists may object to the suggestion that we know what’s best for them. “Keep your compassion to yourself. I want to behave this way!” they might say. Well, you can behave that way, but don’t expect the rest of society to endorse it. That would be unloving. Promoting homosexuality with government-backed same-sex marriage would not only hurt you, but it would also hurt our children and our country.

Keep Reading!

Compliments of Correct, not Politically Correct, authored by Frank Turek. For more information, visit www.impactapologetics.com.

60 David Kupelian, The Marketing of Evil, (Nashville, WND Books, 2005), pg. 37.

61 J. Budziszewski, What We Can’t Not Know, (Dallas: Spence, 2003), pg. 190.

62 George Gilder, Men and Marriage, (Adler, 1986), pg. 74.


Like this information? Help us by sharing it with others using the social media buttons below. What is this?




Follow Us:




Spanish   Dutch  
Social Media
Follow Us:

Share Us:


Popular Issues

Same Sex Marriage Debate
Homosexual Health
Same Sex Marriage Conclusion
Against Same Sex Marriage Video
Homosexual Behavior
Natural Marriage Video
Against Same Sex Marriage
Promote Natural Marriage
Acceptance of Homosexuality
Additional Content To Explore...

Does God Exist Scientifically?
Does God Exist Philosophically?
Is The Bible True?
Who Is God?
Who is Jesus?
What Do You Believe?
How Can I Grow With God?
Life Challenges
Recovery
 
 
 
Search
 
Add Cons of Same Sex Marriage to My Google!
Add Cons of Same Sex Marriage to My Yahoo!
XML Feed: Cons of Same Sex Marriage
Love Home | About Us | Support Us | FAQ | Sitemap
Copyright © 2002 - 2014 AllAboutLove.org, All Rights Reserved.