Same-sex marriage advocates gain a lot of support for their position by painting the opposing side as anti-gay homophobes. Nobody wants to be thought of as anti-gay, a homophobe, or discriminatory. To avoid such labels and associations, they acquiesce to the cause of same-sex marriage. Much could be said in response to this tactic, but I will limit my response to four related points.
First, as Dennis Prager recently observed, opposition to same-sex marriage is no more anti-gay than opposition to incestual marriage is anti-family. What one thinks about the union of parts cannot be extrapolated to reflect their thoughts on each component of that union when considered apart from the union. In the same way that opposition to incestual marriages does not mean one hates brothers and sisters, opposition to same-sex marriage does not mean one hates gays. One can be opposed to social recognition of same-sex relationships as “marriage,” while fully supportive of gay individuals.
Secondly, this claim ignores the fact that an argument can be made against same-sex marriage independent of any moral assessment of homosex or sexual orientation. I have made such a case in “I Now Pronounce You Man and Husband?”: An Argument Against Same-Sex Marriage.
Thirdly, some homosexuals have publicly argued for homosexual rights, but oppose same-sex marriage because they believe it would be bad for society. This proves that opposition to same-sex marriage cannot be equated with opposition to homosexuality.
Finally, few people who oppose homosexuality, yet alone same-sex marriage, are homophobic. A homophobe is someone who fears homosexuals. I have never met such an individual. I have met a multitude of people, however, who object to homosex on moral and social grounds. So the next time someone wants to equate your opposition to same-sex marriage with being anti-gay, challenge them on it.
Thinking to Believe 
November 14, 2008 at 4:00 pm
One point. You note that the phobia in homophobia refers to fear. True, but it’s more than just fear; it’s an *irrational* fear. By labeling something a “phobia,” they assume the very thing that they need to prove.
LikeLike
November 14, 2008 at 6:22 pm
Good point. Thanks for clarifying that.
LikeLike
January 14, 2009 at 11:36 pm
Nobody wants to painted as “anti-gay, a homophobe, or discriminatory,” so they develop a priori arguments against gay marriage that don’t sound like they are those things.
You and I both know that Christians are against gay marriage for reasons that are anti-gay and discriminatory. Christians believe that homosexual behaviour is immoral and do not wish to legitimise it by recognising their relationships as legally valid.
That argument does not work as a foundation for a civil, not religious, legal framework for forbidding gay marriage. Therefore you construct a hollow argument against gay marriage as being inherently destructive to the institution of marriage. There is no evidence for this and it is plainly not the logical conclusion. Other’s relationship with the state and each other has no material affect on your own relationship.
It’s like if I was sincerely convinced that wearing yellow causes tuberculosis. If someone else wanted to wear yellow but didn’t believe that it would cause any sort of life-threatening disease, I might tell them that wearing yellow makes them look fat or is a sign of poor character. The argument is still invalid, but not falsifiable in the same way.
I don’t believe you “hate gays.” I believe the foundation for your morality is religious. That religion proscribes homosexual activity. That religion, however, is not the basis for our laws or the source of our rights.
LikeLike
January 15, 2009 at 1:08 pm
Lance,
You’re right, people generally try to avoid those distasteful labels, but how does this relate to whether arguments against same-sex marriage are bad/wrong? Rational arguments stand or fall on their own merits, not on the motivation or feelings of those who make them. You have dismissed the arguments by investigating the motivations/feelings of those who advance them. That is the ad hominem fallacy, pure and simple.
And how does it follow that anyone who argues against same-sex marriage is really just “anti-gay, homophobic,” and “discriminatory?” This post was intended to show why this perception is wrong-headed. I provided four reasons for thinking so. Rather than critiquing my reasons, you simply reaffirmed the mistaken notion that opposition to same-sex marriage is really just an outflow of one’s moral distaste for homosexuality. Prove the logical connection. That will be hard to do given the fact that even a minority within the gay community do not think marriage should be redefined to include same-sex couples.
Are some Christians “against gay marriage for reasons that are anti-gay and discriminatory”? Sure, just as some atheists oppose religious people praying at public events because they are anti-God and discriminate against the rights of religious believers. So? That’s irrelevant because we’re back to motivations again and the ad hominem fallacy. What matters is the argument. As I have demonstrated in my various articles and posts, there are legitimate, rational, secular, amoral reasons for thinking marriage should be reserved exclusively for opposite-sex couples. Arguments, not motivations matter. Even if I secretly hated gay people, and that’s why I didn’t want to see marriage opened up to same-sex couples, it would not detract from my policy argument. It is just as wrong to think our secular argument against same-sex marriage should be ignored because those of us who make it may have personal, religious, or bigoted reasons for wanting to exclude same-sex couples from marriage, as it would be for me to say the arguments presented by same-sex advocates for the inclusion of same-sex couples in the institution of marriage should be ignored because those who make such arguments harbor a personal hatred of religious-based morality. Who cares what they think about religion! What matters is their arguments. I suggest you focus on ours, rather than our imagined motivations.
Jason
LikeLike
June 6, 2009 at 9:52 am
“A homophobe is someone who fears homosexuals. I have never met such an individual.”
Probably because you’ve never dealt with homosexuality. As a Christian guy who has a homosexual orientation (but is celibate for religious reasons), I’ve faced a lot of really awful comments and fearful, hateful behavior from fellow Christians, and I’m supposed to be on their side, Biblically!
I do think that motivations matter in this. If someone has come up to me and been mean about my sexual struggles, then I’m not going to take any Scriptural arguments they make seriously, because they’ve already demonstrated that they are just using Scripture to validate a personal bias. Someone has to demonstrate that their emotions really are impartial before I take their arguments seriously.
LikeLike
June 6, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Jay,
If by “dealt with” you mean “personally struggled with same-sex attraction, that is true. But given the fact that I am a Christian, I have encountered a lot of people who are opposed to homosex, and I have never met someone who is AFRAID of homosexuals (what “homophobe” means). Someone who is an arachnaphobist is someone who fears spiders, not someone who doesn’t like spiders. The same is true of a homophobe. It is a person who is afraid of homosexuals, not someone who doesn’t like them. I have no doubt that there are lots of people who hate homosexuals, but I don’t know anyone who is afraid of them.
It is regrettable that you have experienced this kind of treatment at the hand of fellow Christians, particularly given the fact that you agree with them that same-sex attraction is not natural, and homosex is immoral.
I am a little confused by your comments though. On the one hand you say you are on the side of Christians, Biblically, but then you say you won’t listen to people’s Scriptural arguments unless their emotions are impartial to homosexuality. What would there be for them to convince you of if you believe the Bible is opposed to homosex?
I think a lot of Christians are under the mistaken impression that those who struggle with same-sex attraction choose to do so. They don’t. The desires are not chosen. The only thing that is chosen is whether or not one acts on those desires.
Jason
LikeLike
June 6, 2009 at 2:26 pm
Sorry, looking back at my comment, I should have been more clear. What I meant to say was that the people who mistreated me (or other gay people) in the past and showed hatred or prejudice towards me effectively ruined their own Scriptural arguments, if that makes sense. Perhaps what I meant is that if one speaks the truth, but does not do it with any visible love or humility, then their arguments are somewhat meaningless. No one will listen to them.
Also, even if I didn’t agree with Christians about homosexual behavior being a sin (which I do), I would hope they would still refrain from name-calling and bullying. Sadly, that’s not always the case.
And, frankly, when I first came to Christ, it wasn’t because I was convicted of homosexual behavior. I was a virgin, anyway. I was convicted of my pride, my arrogance, and my temper. It wasn’t until maybe a year or so later that I first decided to be celibate (though that hasn’t been the easiest road, and I can’t say I’ve never stumbled).
Maybe one of the most most effective ways to witness to gay people is to focus on the sins you can agree on, and then let the Holy Spirit do the convicting about the other ones. I’m not going to say that no one does a 180 degree turnaround upon conversion, but I think with most people, it’s a slower process.
Anyway, thanks for listening. Take care!
LikeLike
June 8, 2009 at 11:24 am
Jay,
Thanks for clearing that up. While I believe we should be respectful to all people because they are made in the image of God, and I do not think name-calling is ever productive for persuasion (although I cannot say that derogatory names are precluded by Christians, given that Paul, and even Jesus Himself, used them at times), arguments are either good or bad in themselves, regardless of the person presenting them. I could be the biggest jerk in the world, and yet if my argument is true, it is true. Conversely, I could be the nicest person in the world, and yet if my arguments are bad, they are bad. Having said that, I understand your point that it is easier for people to listen to our arguments when we are not distracted by their attitude. I completely agree.
Your decision to remain celebate is a wise, and Christian one. I’m glad you have taken this road, rather than the one employed so often by those with a same-sex attraction: try to justify homosex Biblically.
As for witnessing to homosexuals, I agree with you. While I don’t think we should avoid the homosex issue, neither need it be our initial point of contention. The homosexual needs salvation because s/he is a sinner. Homosexual behavior is just one of many sins they need saving from.
Jason
LikeLike
May 16, 2013 at 12:08 pm
[…] Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage is not Anti-Gay […]
LikeLike