Why Be Concerned about Same-Sex Marriage? -- By: Gary R. Gromacki
JMAT 9:2 (Fall 2005) p. 63
Why Be Concerned about Same-Sex Marriage?
Associate Professor of Bible and Homiletics
Baptist Bible Seminary, Clarks Summit, Pennsylvania
Surprisingly, moral values was the top issue influencing voters in the 2004 election. Moral values influenced voters more than the war in Iraq, terrorism, and the economy. People in America are concerned about the moral values of their leaders on abortion, stem-cell research, and same-sex marriage. President Bush’s stance on moral values helped him win reelection. On Election Day 2004 eleven states approved bans on same-sex marriage. But the battle for traditional marriage is far from over. This article will (1) review the recent history of the battle for traditional marriage, (2) explain some relevant scripture texts that defend traditional marriage and condemn homosexuality, (3) show the results of cultural acceptance of same-sex marriage, and (4) give some action steps to show how Christians can get involved in defending traditional marriage today.
Recent History of the Battle for Traditional Marriage
June 30, 1986 - The United States Supreme Court gives its decision on Bowers v. Hardwick. Hardwick had been charged by Bowers, the Attorney General of Georgia, with violating the Georgia statute which criminalizes sodomy. Hardwick had been discovered committing the act of sodomy with another adult man in the bedroom of his home. Hardwick brought a lawsuit in federal district court, challenging the constitutionality of this statute. In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court rules the Georgia statute to be constitutional.
The United States Supreme Court states:
The Constitution does not confer a fundamental right upon homosexuals to engage in sodomy. None of the fundamental rights announced in this Court’s prior cases involving family relationships, marriage, or
JMAT 9:2 (Fall 2005) p. 64
procreation bear any resemblance to the right asserted in this case. And any claim that those cases stand for the proposition that any kind of private sexual conduct between consenting adults is constitutionally insulated from state proscription is unsupportable.1
The Supreme Court also states:
It is obvious to us that neither of these formulations would extend a fundamental right to homosexuals to engage in acts of consensual sodomy. Proscriptions against that conduct have ancient roots. Sodomy was a criminal offense at common law and was forbidden by the laws of the original 13 States when they ratified the Bill of Rights. In 1868, when the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified, all but 5 of the 37 States in the Uni...
Click here to subscribe