The Uncomfortable Subject

I recently came across a blog by Michael Craven on his site, Battle for Truth. He did a series called “Defense of Marriage” which I thought was a good attempt to stake out some ground in the gay marriage debate that did not require any Biblical quotations. It got me thinking about the inordinate amount of time, energy and media output that is devoted to the issue of homosexual behavior, given the small number of the affected population. It is understandably difficult to get a precise number, but the latest estimate of the gay population in the US is about 1.7% of the total. That’s 17 people in 1,000 or 5.3 million in the US.

I know five million sounds like a large number, but in a country of three hundred million, it’s not just a minority, it’s a tiny minority. So my question is where did they get such a loud voice. There are a similar number of Muslims in the US, yet you seldom hear from them unless they blow something up, which may be an instructive parallel, since the Muslim jihad probably has about the same percentage of adherents as the gays have activists. If that comparison is accurate, it means that less than one tenth of either group is responsible for their notoriety. That makes their “spokesmen” one tenth of one percent of total population. A minuscule minority.

I have a theory about this (as you knew I would). It is easy to see why the enemy of God would want to promote Islam, especially radical Islam. It calls for the conversion of the world to a false religion. It calls for the elimination of all who don’t comply. The battle lines here are obvious. But can one imagine the same kind of strategy behind the gay agenda. Look closely. The LGBT agenda calls for the acceptance of a “lifestyle” that would shatter traditional family values and structures. This is not only detrimental to the foundation of society, as Craven asserts, but it is theologically explosive as well.

In Genesis’ first chapter, God is said to have made humans in his own image; the language specifically says that male and female (together) were representative of his image. The second chapter of Genesis corroborates this by insisting that Adam was not complete without Eve. Adam and Steve don’t create the same complementary whole. A few verses later it cements the idea by calling the union of husband and wife a “one flesh” creation. I don’t wish to be salacious, but no matter what you put where, only the biologically complementary nature of male and female makes sense of this picture.

It goes without saying that the command to be fruitful and multiply is not within the realm of homosexual possibilities. But I think there is more to this than meets the biologist’s eye. I believe God was still thinking of his image when he built the family. In my opinion, the father/mother/child triad most fully represents the image of God in humans. A man or woman alone remains an image bearer, but the best reflection of a triune God is the triad of family.

As a further testament to God’s interest in promoting family, note his emphasis in Old Testament law.  Fully one half of capital crimes were for sexual perversion and family related acts; the remainder was for religious infractions or violent acts. I believe the emphasis on sex and family reflects God’s concern for purity in this area. Like so many of God’s commands, we learn (sometimes too late) that there are practical reasons why he proscribed certain things while prescribing others. The breakdown of the family leads to the break-up of society. This was the point made by Craven. What a surprise to learn once again that God had our best interests in mind when he made the rules.

Even though the gay population is small, it is one that should not be ignored. The median size church in America has 75 attendees on a given Sunday, so that means there would be 1.2 gays. Given the sad statistics on divorce and extra-marital sex among Christians, there are probably far more adulterers and fornicators in any given church than gays. Let’s not even consider the number of gossips, gluttons, disobedient children, and greedy or covetous persons seated in the pews. The church should have one message: any sex outside of marriage is wrong, but Christ welcomes all sinners of all types to come to the Cross. At the foot of that tree, any repentant heart can find redemption and release. Maybe the real question should be why the other sinners don’t feel as uncomfortable as the gays.