Is Marriage Worth Rescuing?
By Travis K. McSherley

It started with the tap of a gavel.  When the Supreme Court issued its June 26 decision in the Lawrence v. Texas case, conservative critics proclaimed dire warnings that the ruling would create a “slippery slope” of tolerating immorality.

“That’s ridiculous,” retorted homosexual activists, at the same time throwing their fists into the air in triumphant celebration.

Will the Lawrence decision become the beginning of the end of the conventional definition of marriage?  A substantial number of advocates on both sides of the aisle see the possibility.  In fact, it seems that the landslide may have already begun.  Traditional family values have taken brutal hits in recent weeks.

In New York City, a new public high school is being opened for homosexual students, supposedly to shield them from the grievous harassment they receive at Mainstream High.  No doubt some homosexual kids receive unwanted taunting and teasing and abuse for their choice, but locking them in a taxpayer-funded bubble is no solution.  And it’s hard to believe that this school -- and any others that follow its model -- will not become an indoctrination center for the homosexual agenda.

Even segments of the church are promoting acceptance of homosexuality, undermining the Word of God that supposedly forms the foundation on which they stand.  On August 5, the Episcopal Church elected its first openly gay bishop, amidst a profusion of controversy and the threat of a split within the church.  The next day, church leaders passed a resolution allowing dioceses to offer blessing of same-sex unions.

If there ever were a valid reason to break off from a denomination, this is it.  Only an utter and deliberate perversion of Scripture could fabricate God’s approval of these decisions.  Defenders of the new bishop argue that cultural acceptance creates justification for sexual preferences.  Besides, they note, condemnation of homosexuality is absent from the teachings of Christ recorded in the Gospel.

To which Jesus might answer, as He did regarding a question about divorce: “Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning made them male and female, and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?  So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate” (Matthew 19:4-6 NASB).

Of course, Jesus did not, in fact, make specific references forbidding homosexuality -- nor did He single out incest, polygamy or other forms of sexual depravity.  But the writings of Moses (which Jesus quoted in Matthew 19), Paul and others made God’s intention plain enough.

And this cultural war culminates on the battlefield of marriage, the final trophy that would justify “alternative” lifestyles once and for all.  Perhaps it is a stretch to link a court decision, a bishop and a high school to the value of marriage, but the connection is apparent.  For the result is the same in all of them -- homosexuality finds closer status as an accepted way of life morally equal to the traditional family. 

President Bush recently took the bold and welcome step of defending marriage as limited to one man and one woman.

“I think it is very important for our society to respect each individual, to welcome those with good hearts, to be a welcoming country,” the President said.  “On the other hand, that does not mean that somebody like me needs to compromise on an issue such as marriage.  I believe in the sanctity of marriage. I believe a marriage is between a man and a woman, and I think we ought to codify that one way or the other.”

A statement by the Vatican was even sharper, arguing that allowing homosexuals to wed would mean the “approval of deviant behavior,” while obscuring “basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity.”

Is an amendment to the U.S. Constitution an ideal solution to this threat?  Admittedly no, but it’s a far better idea than leaving the issue to the throes of the High Court.  And right now, public opinion is against gay marriage enough that a movement to amend would stand a fair chance of success.  That may not always be the case.

Canada has already brought same-sex marriage to our doorstep, and a court decision in Massachusetts could send the U.S. debate into overdrive.  The criticality of the marriage question cannot be overstated.

When taken seriously, the matrimonial covenant between a man and woman is the second greatest asset of a community and nation (the first is the progeny of that union).  These assets must be protected.  Study after study links healthy marriages to the physical and emotional well being of children -- and their parents.

This isn’t about applying or taking away “civil rights” from anyone.  It’s about protecting the institution at the core of our society.  To cheapen it with rampant adultery and divorce is a shame.  To redefine the relationship entirely is devastating.

The battle to keep marriage sacred is broad, and it could get nasty.  But the future of the country truly is at stake.  So the question is, do we think marriage is worth putting up this fight?

I do.