I did my doctoral dissertation on the Bible and homosexuality,and worked for many years in public policy in Washington DC defending traditional marriage. I believe that Olson’s opinion piece makes just about the strongest case possible for the legal acceptance of gay marriage. I say “possible” because I believe that, contra Olson, that reason, history, human sexuality properly understood, and biblical faith argue convincingly against the societal acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual marriage.
It is much too late to attempt to launch into a detailed response to Olson. I would, however, like to briefly mention what I believe are the most essential points arguing against Olson’s position.
First history: Olson fails to consider why no developed society has ever sanctioned homosexual marriage. A rare few, such as the Greeks and some remote pre-literate tribal cultures, tolerated homosexuality within certain well-defined limits, and primarily as a developmental stage for some young men between the onset of puberty and marriage. In no wise did the Greeks permit homosexuals to “marry”: for the Greeks, marriage was defined as between a man and a woman. Olson would do well to consider why is the collective wisdom of human history has limited marriage to between men and women (the existence of polygamy and polyandry does not negate this truth).
Second, it is incontrovertible that biblical faith is unalterably opposed to homosexual behavior, a fact admitted to by homosexual advocates, who are reduced to attempting to minimize the force of the biblical testimony. For Olson to treat the biblical teachings so dismissively reveals a not-so-subtle contempt for the moral underpinnings of our society. I suspect Olson would not dare apply the facile argument the “we can’t force our morality on others” to the rest of the 10 commandments (homosexual behavior is considered part of the prohibition of adultery), which as he well knows has formed the basis of the Western legal tradition for two millennia.
Third, while seemingly accepting every caricature of the conservative/biblical position, Olson turns around and embraces a wholly naive and superficial picture of the homosexual lifestyle. Repeatedly he refers to homosexual couples in the most glowing of terms regarding their mutual commitment to each other and their children. The reality, as he must know, is very different. I have written extensively on the degradation of the homosexual lifestyle, and the almost complete absence of the values that are assumed between married couples. Someone in this thread has rightly pointed out that, indeed, few wives would tolerate the demand for “Thursday nights off.” Yet the research indicates that “open” relationships is virtually the norm even with so-called “committed” homosexual couples. One study found that, among those homosexual couples who managed to endure five years (a monumental achievement for gay relationships), NONE were monogamous. Compare this to studies that show that between 75-80% or more of married couples are monogamous. If Olson does not realize that homosexuals conceive of their “commitments” in terms that would leave married people aghast, he has not done his homework, and willfully chooses to believe a lie.
Homosexual activists have admitted that their goal is not merely to be allowed to marry - only a small percentage choose to enter into such an “outmoded” and “restrictive” legal relationship (even with their redefinition of “monogamy”). Rather, their stated goal is none other than the overturning of marriage as understood in the Judeo-Christian tradition, and reflected in most other religions and cultures, to be replaced by a pan-sexuality that knows few if any restrictions upon sexual activity. Homosexual activism is best understood as dagger at the heart of Judeo-Christian morality. If they are successful, and our society embraces - yea “celebrates” - homosexuality and homosexual marriage, God help us all. This, for example, is the real danger behind “hate crimes” legislation, which many observers fear could lead to opposition to homosexuality becoming a federal crime punishable by imprisonment. Olson apparently has no idea of the beast he is determined to help unleash.
He's perfectly aware. He is a fascist traitor.
Thank you for your detailed response. You might consider making it a thread of its own. I don’t have any credentials but I have been keenly interested in the theological and cultural debate on this issue because it provides a sharp distinction between two clashing world views. Views which I believe are irreconcilable and will result in a division of the Church and culture.
You know as well as I do that your three points of disagreement are met with contrary liberal arguments, which although logically unsound, are very appealing to the ear for the opposing view.
I will add to your conclusion about motivation. Many are in rebellion to God’s authority because they want to be accepted without believing they are sinners. The tragedy is they seek a false acceptance. Even if society blessed their marriage, even if they remained monogamous, even if the Catholic Church declared every homosexual a saint, they would not be satisfied because they know they are sinners. They are sinners not because they are homosexuals but because we are all fallen.
None of us realize how awful we are until we allow God to begin changing our hearts. The sad part of all of this is that many homosexuals are not given the truth so they can surrender themselves to God and allow God to begin transforming them. They are being led to believe they have a savior in government and governments ability to press a raised seal on a piece of paper.
They are being deceived.