What is marriage? For millennia it has been understood as the union of a man and a woman entered into for life, most often with the intention of having children and being a family. Understood in this way marriage has been accepted and honoured by most societies and most religions of the world. Some have allowed a man to have more than one wife, but none has ever regarded the union of two men or two women as marriage.
The movement which wishes to overturn this speaks of marriage equality. It wants marriage to be possible for same-sex attracted persons. But if marriage is redefined in law to allow this, will it not be creating a new institution, which though it may be called “marriage”, will in fact be quite different?
Supposing we decide the game of Australian Rules is too rough for women to be able to play in the same team as men. We could decide this was against equality. We could change the rules to make the game more gentle. But would it still be Aussie Rules? Of course it would not, and there will still be people who want to play by the old rules.
This is one of the problems of changing the law of marriage. I am a Christian. This is not much in vogue today, but there are still a good few of us. We have a well-established understanding of marriage, founded on the teaching of Jesus, which holds that marriage is something instituted by God for the happiness of the human race. When a person is married the celebrant says to the gathering that they have come together in the sight of God and the congregation “to join this man and this woman in holy matrimony”. The minister goes on to say – on the authority of Jesus – “this is an honourable state of life, instituted by God …”. A church leader who said this over a homosexual marriage would not be telling the truth. There can be no blessing of God over a union involving something God has declared sin.
If marriage is redefined in law, it will create two kinds of marriage, homosexual and heterosexual which will not be the same. Equality will still evade us. The only way then to pursue equality would be to somehow enforce the new definition. The only way to do this is to violate people’s consciences. Among other things it would lead to the following:
- Disqualifying as marriage celebrants everyone who refuses to officiate in both homosexual and heterosexual marriages.
- Punishing anyone who carries out old style marriages outside of the state system.
- Teaching the new view of marriage to children at state schools.
- Penalizing schools which continue to teach the normalness of marriage between a man and a woman.
- Allowing businesses to be sued if they decline to be involved in same-sex marriages, which they are not in agreement with.
- Allowing anyone who warns against homosexual practice to be accused of “hate speech” and prosecuted by the law.
There is a movement towards all these things in countries that have changed their definition of marriage.
I must make a clarification here. Two men may decide to live together – even for life. There is nothing wrong with this. Deep friendships are good. But what if they are physically intimate? That would transgress God’s law, but that action could be distinct from the friendship, which may a very fine thing. Christianity is in no way opposed to brotherly love. Equally two women may be devoted to each other and live together for companionship. This is nothing but good. No one should label them. Theoretically, they might even pledge to each other to stay together – they might do it before friends. They are free to do this, and it could be good, but it does not make it marriage.
Changing the definition of marriage is particularly worrying for Christians as it legitimizes and normalizes sexual activity between same-sex couples, which is against the teaching of the Word of God, although there is no law against it in Australia. The Bible warns that persistent behavior along these lines shuts a person out of eternal blessing. Christian ministers are charged by God to teach his ways, so cannot evade this.
The purpose of law is to promote a peaceful and functioning society. Christians are not going to go away. Nor are many others who have similar convictions. Changing the definition of marriage could unleash a great deal of confusion and conflict in our society. If marriage stays as it is, same-sex attracted people may feel they are losing out. They need not feel this, if they accept that marriage is as it always has been. They have as much right to it as anyone else. They are also free to create their own institutions and have them legalized. What they should not do is move the goal posts. This wont promote equality – only change the nature of the game.