Correct, Not Politically Correct

1. The Same-Sex Marriage Debate is About Validation, Not Rights.

Since most homosexuals don’t want to get married or stay married, then why are homosexual activists so adamant about government recognition of same-sex marriage? Because same-sex marriage will win them what they really want—validation and normalization.

Beyond propaganda. The public debate surrounding same-sex marriage is often framed by "propaganda" that misrepresents its true nature. It is not about equality, discrimination, love, or tolerance, as these are "smoke screens" designed to divert attention. The real objective, openly admitted by activists, is to achieve societal validation and normalization of homosexual behavior.

Government endorsement. Homosexual individuals can already commit to one another privately; there's no legal barrier to private same-sex ceremonies. What activists truly seek is government endorsement, which they understand will elevate homosexual relationships to appear as normal and acceptable as heterosexual ones. This push is less about civil rights and more about leveraging government power for social engineering.

Judicial imposition. This movement is not driven by popular will but by legal challenges aimed at courts. Activists bypass democratic processes, knowing that public votes often oppose same-sex marriage, and instead seek to impose it through unelected judges. This strategy, similar to how abortion laws were changed, aims to force societal acceptance without public approval, ultimately sacrificing children, health, and prosperity for perceived benefits to homosexuals.

2. Natural Marriage is Civilization's Indispensable Foundation.

Marriage is a social institution that provides society with the very foundation of civilization—the procreating family unit.

Societal bedrock. Marriage is far more than a private relationship between two loving individuals; it is the oldest and most fundamental institution of Western civilization, predating government and church. Its primary purpose is to provide the stable, procreating family unit essential for raising children and ensuring societal continuity. Strong marriages are the "national immune system," correlating with national strength and fewer social problems.

Profound benefits. Natural marriage offers extensive benefits to individuals and society. It is linked to:

• Longer life spans for men and women.
• Civilized men focused on productive pursuits.
• Protection for women and mothers from economic harm and violent crime.
• Lower welfare costs.
• An adequate birth rate for societal sustainability.
  Children from natural marriage homes are significantly less likely to experience poverty, suicide, crime, or out-of-wedlock pregnancies, and they develop better academically, socially, physically, and emotionally.

Historical evidence. Anthropological studies across five thousand years show that prosperous cultures maintained strong marriage ethics, while those that liberalized sexual practices, like the Roman and Babylonian empires, experienced decline. The importance of marriage is underscored by the unique biological necessity of a man and a woman for procreation, a fundamental truth that homosexual relationships inherently cannot fulfill.

3. Homosexual Behavior is Inherently Destructive and Unhealthy.

The truth is that some relationships are better than others. People are equal, but their behaviors are not.

Medical inferiority. Despite claims of equality, homosexual unions are medically inferior to man-woman unions. Homosexual behavior, particularly male homosexuality, is linked to numerous severe health problems:

• Increased rates of AIDS (over 82% of sexually-transmitted cases in 2006), other STDs, colon and rectal cancer, and hepatitis.
• Shortened life spans, potentially by 8 to 20 years.
• Spread of disease to innocent people through blood transfusions or bisexual contact.
• Higher health insurance premiums for all Americans due to increased healthcare costs.

Monogamy's limits. The argument that government-backed same-sex marriage would encourage monogamy and alleviate health problems is flawed. Homosexual acts themselves are inherently unhealthy, regardless of partner count, as the human body is not designed for anal intercourse. Studies show coupled homosexuals often engage in more risky sexual practices and that monogamy is rare among homosexuals, with an average of 50 lifetime partners compared to 4 for heterosexuals.

Imbalance and promiscuity. The pairing of identical sexes in homosexual relationships often leads to extremes rather than balance. While lesbians may experience emotional extremes, male homosexuals frequently exhibit explosive promiscuity, with 21-43% reporting hundreds of sexual partners. Tragically, male homosexuals, comprising 2-3% of the male population, commit about one-third of all child molestation cases, a connection often denied publicly but acknowledged in some gay and academic circles.

4. The Law Shapes Society: Endorsing Same-Sex Marriage Harms Everyone.

The law is a great teacher, and it encourages or discourages behavior.

Law's power. The law possesses immense power to shape societal attitudes and behaviors over time. Historical examples like the abolition of slavery, the legalization of abortion, and the liberalization of divorce laws demonstrate how legal changes profoundly influence public perception of morality and acceptability. Homosexual activists recognize this, openly stating their goal is to use same-sex marriage laws to "normalize homosexual behavior everywhere else."

Weakening marriage. Government-backed same-sex marriage would fundamentally alter the definition of marriage, diminishing its unique value. Just as an MVP award loses meaning if given to everyone, redefining marriage to include same-sex relationships degrades the institution itself. This erosion is precisely what some anti-marriage radicals, who paradoxically support same-sex marriage, aim to achieve, viewing it as a tool to "transform the notion of 'family' entirely."

Widespread negative impacts. The consequences of government-backed same-sex marriage extend far beyond the immediate parties, hurting all citizens:

• Increased income and social security taxes.
• Higher medical insurance premiums and reduced employee benefits.
• Legal preference for homosexual couples in adoption, treating children as "trophies."
• Indoctrination of children in schools and workplaces to accept homosexuality.
• Curtailment of free speech and religious freedom, criminalizing opposition as "hate speech."
• Growth of intrusive government programs and regulations.

5. Same-Sex Marriage Undermines Parenthood and Harms Children.

One can believe in same-sex marriage. One can believe that every child deserves a mother and a father. One cannot believe both.

Nullifying parenthood. A crucial argument against same-sex marriage, even from liberal proponents like David Blankenhorn, is its detrimental impact on children. Legalizing same-sex marriage would "nullify" the fundamental principle that every child needs both a mother and a father, both in culture and in law. This redefinition would disconnect marriage from its primary purpose of child-rearing, viewing it merely as "coupling."

Rise of illegitimacy. If marriage is no longer seen as a prerequisite for children, more couples will forgo natural marriage, leading to a rise in out-of-wedlock births. Data from countries like Norway, which have embraced de-facto same-sex marriage, show a dramatic increase in illegitimacy rates, with marriage itself nearly disappearing in some regions. This trend directly correlates with increased social problems, crime, poverty, and higher taxpayer costs.

Children's welfare. The welfare of children is paramount, and extensive research shows that a loving mom and dad provide the optimal environment for a child's development. Homosexual relationships, by their nature, always deny a child either their mother or their father. Homosexual activists' assertion that parents are interchangeable, while simultaneously recognizing sex differences in their own desires, demonstrates a prioritization of adult sexual desires over children's best interests.

6. "Equal Rights" and "Born That Way" Arguments Are Fallacious.

Everyone in America already has equal rights. We are all playing by the same rules—we all have the same right to marry any qualified person from the opposite sex.

No special rights. The "equal rights" slogan is a deceptive battle cry. All Americans already possess the equal right to marry a qualified person of the opposite sex. Homosexual activists seek "special rights" to marry someone of the same sex, which, if granted, would logically extend to other socially destructive relationships like polygamy or incest. Desires do not automatically constitute rights, and the government's role is not to endorse every private desire.

"Born that way" fallacy. The "born that way" argument, suggesting homosexual desires are innate and thus justify behavior, is equally flawed. While the source of homosexual desires is debated and not definitively genetic (as evidenced by identical twin studies), even a genetic predisposition does not excuse behavior. We all have desires we ought not to act on, and civilization itself is built on the "disciplined restraint of destructive desires."

Behavior vs. identity. Homosexuality is a behavior, not an identity or a class like race. Skin color is benign and unchosen, while sexual behavior is a choice and can be harmful. To classify people by sexual desires opens the door to recognizing all sexual desires as rights, regardless of their destructive nature. Furthermore, many individuals have successfully changed their homosexual orientation and behavior, disproving the claim that change is impossible.

7. "Love" and "Tolerance" Do Not Justify Endorsing Harmful Behavior.

Love requires us to stand in opposition to behavior that will likely hurt or kill our loved ones.

Love's true meaning. The argument that "same-sex marriage is about love" misunderstands the state's purpose in endorsing marriage. Government sanctions marriage for its societal benefits—primarily procreation and stable child-rearing—not merely for mutual affection. True love, by definition, seeks the ultimate good of the loved one, which is contradicted by engaging in medically dangerous homosexual acts that cause disease, pain, and shortened life spans.

Beyond mere tolerance. The call for "tolerance" is also misapplied. Homosexual behavior is already permitted in the United States; the debate is about moving beyond tolerance to active endorsement. Tolerance is a virtue when listening to diverse viewpoints, but a vice when it means allowing destructive behavior to harm society. Civilized societies are inherently intolerant of harmful acts like murder or theft, and love demands intervention, not indifference, when destructive behaviors are at play.

Hypocrisy of demands. Homosexual activists often exhibit a double standard, demanding tolerance for their views while being intolerant of opposing perspectives. They seek to impose their agenda through courts and "hate-crime" legislation, which curtails free speech and religious freedom, as seen in Canada and Sweden. This one-way street of tolerance, where dissent is criminalized, reveals a desire for validation and suppression of truth rather than genuine mutual respect.

8. Opposing Same-Sex Marriage is Based on Reason, Not Bigotry or Homophobia.

Opposition to same-sex marriage is not based on bigotry but on good reason.

Reasoned discrimination. Laws inherently discriminate against harmful behaviors, not persons. Just as laws against murder, rape, or incest are based on sound reason for public welfare, opposition to same-sex marriage stems from evidence that it is harmful to individuals and society. This is not bigotry, which involves prejudice without cause, but a wise discernment that some behaviors are more beneficial than others.

"Homophobe" as a diversion. The accusation of "homophobia" is often a tactic to silence rational argument. While some fears are irrational, the fear of homosexuality held by parents and loved ones is often justified by the documented health dangers, social dysfunctions, and inability to procreate associated with homosexual behavior. This concern is rooted in a "complete understanding of the facts," not ignorance or prejudice.

Moral consistency. Those who label opposition to same-sex marriage as "bigotry" often employ selective morality. They recognize bigotry as absolutely wrong, appealing to an inherent moral standard, yet refuse to apply that same standard to homosexual behavior. This inconsistency highlights a desire to ignore "nature's law" when it conflicts with personal desires, while invoking it when it serves their political agenda.

9. Activist Courts Threaten Democracy and Necessitate Constitutional Protection for Marriage.

When any court oversteps its bounds and usurps the will of the people by legislating from the bench, the only sure remedy is to ignore the court and impeach the justices.

Judicial overreach. The push for same-sex marriage is largely driven by activist courts that bypass the democratic process, imposing their views on the populace. When unelected judges "make up rights that aren’t in either state constitution," they usurp the will of the people. This judicial activism, as seen in Massachusetts and California, has the potential to force all other states to recognize same-sex marriages through the "full faith and credit clause" of the U.S. Constitution, effectively overriding state laws and popular votes.

Constitutional amendment. Given the threat of judicial imposition, a constitutional amendment is presented as the most practical way to protect natural marriage. While judges could theoretically ignore even an amendment, the process of amending the Constitution involves the American people, making it harder for any court to blatantly disregard their will. This measure aims to restore the people's right to decide on fundamental social institutions.

Preserving societal wisdom. For millennia, societies have recognized marriage as the union of one man and one woman, based on natural design and its benefits to society. Activist courts, by moving this "fence" without understanding its purpose, risk dismantling a foundational institution. A deliberative legislative process, rather than swift judicial decrees, is essential to ensure that decisions about marriage are made with wisdom, considering the long-term welfare of children and civilization.

10. True Love Requires Opposing Destructive Behavior, Not Enabling It.

I believe that everyone does wrong, including me, and that I am called to hate everything harmful and wrong in someone’s life while unconditionally loving that person as a person.

Love's tough truth. True love, whether personal or societal, demands confronting and opposing destructive behavior, not enabling it. Just as a friend's parents tragically enabled a homosexual lifestyle that led to their son's death from AIDS, society risks a similar fate by endorsing same-sex marriage. This is not about condemning individuals but about rejecting practices that are demonstrably harmful to health, children, and the fabric of civilization.

Conscience and truth. Individuals who suppress the truth about destructive behaviors often react with rage and hostility when confronted, attempting to silence those who speak it. This "revenge of conscience" leads to self-defeating arguments and hypocrisy, as people prioritize their desires over facts. True compassion involves patient but firm opposition, helping individuals move away from self-destructive paths, rather than validating them.

A call to action. The debate over same-sex marriage is a public policy issue concerning the standard of behavior a nation ought to endorse for its general welfare. Endorsing same-sex marriage would promote false ideas: that homosexual behavior is beneficial, that parents are interchangeable, and that marriage is merely coupling, disconnected from procreation. For the sake of future generations, it is imperative to stand for natural marriage, even if it is unpopular, because conscience dictates it is "right."

Last updated: January 8, 2026