Gay marriage advocates (I prefer the term homosexual marriage) often compare their issue with interracial marriage. Let’s get down and understand why they would do this, and see if it stands up to scrutiny.
Interracial marriage laws existed because people thought that racial purity was a good thing to such an extent that having a state enforce laws barring marriage (and at the time, sexual relations) among interracial couples was a good idea. Obviously, we don’t agree with that idea. Nowadays, most people agree that the differences between the races of men are mostly trivial, and racial purity is not a preference significant enough to demand state laws enforcing it.
Heterosexual marriage, AKA marriage, is between one man and one woman. Those who support this definition of marriage believe that there is a fundamental difference between the two sexes of humankind, namely male and female. Obviously, they believe that when it comes to reproduction, which is associated with marriage, these differences are important to the extent that it makes sense to mandate through laws that other forms of marriage are prohibited. This goes further into saying that not only for reproduction purposes, but for child-rearing purposes, the differences between the sexes is significant enough that there should be a law that dictates that marriages must contain one of each sex.
Homosexual marriage advocates disagree with this. Obviously, they can’t argue that it takes a man and a woman to create new life. This is inarguable. Perhaps one day technology will exist to allow eggs to be fertilized with the material that comes from another woman, or for a man to produce an egg; this is speculation. Beyond that, homosexual marriage advocates believe that the differences between the sexes are not significant enough that marriage should be between a man and a woman, that families based on man-man relationships or woman-woman relationships are not only equal, but in some cases, preferable.
This is the core of the argument, and this is why the link between interracial marriage and homosexual marriage is not as simple as homosexual marriage advocates wish it was.
Unfortunately for homosexual marriage advocates, there is the scholarly idea that the differences between the sexes are not only significant, but have a dramatic impact on the married people and their children. Children who are raised in homes with a father and a mother tend to do far better than their peers (save for cases where a spouse is lost to death.) It seems even scientific literature is contradicting the beliefs of those who would wish to redefine marriage.
Religiously, it is clear that the differences between the races is not significant. We know this because in the Bible, those who were born into the family of Israel have no superior ranking or rights than those who are proselytes. In fact, Jesus himself chose to be born through the lineage of a woman who was not originally Israelite, but later adopted into the family through marriage and through adoption of their religious practices. So the ban on interracial marriages never made sense.
Religiously, we know that God created man and woman for the sole purpose of being married, bearing and raising children. A consistent theme throughout the Bible is the lesson that sexual purity is a very important thing, and that those who chose to violate God’s law of chastity find heartbreak and hardship as the natural consequence of their behavior.
What homosexual marriage advocates are really doing is shaking their fist at the Natural Law that governs all things. They live a lifestyle in direct contradiction to the plainest understanding of the Natural Law, and they wish to punish those who choose to obey the Natural Law, or at least force them to acknowledge their transgressions as equivalent to obedience.
They may persist in this fallacy, and the result of their persistence will be death, death to all things good, happy, and alive. We will see in a matter of a few years what progeny the homosexual generation leaves behind. How many children do homosexuals bear and raise, versus Christians who believe in the sanctity of marriage and are committed to fulfilling God’s commandment to multiple and replenish the earth? With no new generation to replace the dying old, their political ideas will die as well. Good riddance.