Nature, the Homophobe

How does same-sex marriage detract or threaten the institution of heterosexual marriage?

LR: We can also ask how does polygamy or plural marriages "detract or threaten the institution of same-sex marriage?" Yet, most same-sex marriage advocates have no problem banning those types of relationships. To be intellectually consistent, those relationships (and others) would need to be part of the institution, which would effectively eliminate any meaningful meaning to marriage. In other words, marriage would no longer exist.

Second, marriage throughout history has always been recognized as an opposite-sex relationship in recognition of our nature as human beings. Marriage brings together opposite genders into a complementary union. (See Designed for Sex).

Same-sex marriage advocates reject this appeal to nature but point to "loving, consenting adults" in same-sex relationships. Where do they get the notion of loving? Of consenting? Of adults? These concepts also go to our very nature as human beings.

We recognize love as filling a necessary human need for relationship. We do not violate the will (consent) of human beings. For example, it is wrong to own humans but not pets. And we recognize that adults will (generally speaking) have more wisdom to handle the powerful bonds (both emotionally and sexually) of the marital relationship. Animals instinctively mate when their bodies are ready but human maturity is more than just physical maturation.

So same-sex marriage advocates pick and choose which parts of nature to which they will appeal; accepting only the parts that will benefit their cause. Intellectual consistency demands that if appeals to nature are illegitimate and discriminatory than all appeals to nature should be dropped. Or explain why only parts of nature must be appealed to. Same-sex marriage advocates do neither.

In fact, marriage as a union between "two" people is equally discriminatory. Two finds its meaning in our nature as sexual beings. That is, two people coming together in a sexual union. That is the concept of couple (aka coupling). While multiple ways exist to engage in a sexual union, only one is the way nature made the sexual organs to function and that is through opposite-sex sexual unions. Sans appeals to nature, "two" becomes an arbitrary number to exclude relationships (like polygamy and polyamory) with which same-sex marriage advocates are uncomfortable.

Same-sex marriage doesn't just threaten marriage; it threatens the very way we view ourselves as human beings. If you have a problem with that then take it up with nature, the true homophobe.