Why the Push for Homosexual Marriage?

Many homosexuals – perhaps most – are not even interested in marriage. Thus it must be asked, just why is it that some homosexuals are so insistent on marriage rights? Why the very strong push by at least some in the homosexual community to be able to marry?

As many homosexuals themselves admit, a major reason why they want marriage is not so much to be like heterosexuals, or because they want to abandon their more free and promiscuous lifestyle, but because of its symbolic value. It will give them public recognition, approval and acceptance. This has long been the overriding goal of the homosexual lobby: complete social and public endorsement and approval. Thus by getting marriage rights, and, in turn, the last hurdle for homosexuals, full adoption rights, homosexuals will have achieved their longstanding goal: legitimising the homosexual lifestyle.

As even Time magazine admitted, in an article on same-sex marriage, the real goal is complete social acceptance and validation: “Ultimately, of course, the battle for gay marriage has always been about more than winning the second-driver discount at the Avis counter. In fact, the individual who has done most to push same-sex marriage – a brilliant 43-year-old lawyer-activist named Evan Wolfson – doesn’t even have a boyfriend. He and the others who brought the marriage lawsuits of the past decade want nothing less than full social equality, total validation – not just the right to inherit a mother-in-law’s Cadillac. As Andrew Sullivan, the (also persistently single) intellectual force behind gay marriage, has written, ‘Including homosexuals within marriage would be a means of conferring the highest form of social approval imaginable’.”

A leading American homosexual who has championed the cause of same-sex marriage, Jonathan Rauch, admits that this will be an important effect of same sex marriage: “it will ennoble and dignify gay love and sex as it has done straight love and sex”. Exactly, but as I have shown above, such a dangerous threat to public health and safety should not be ennobled or dignified, certainly not by governments who have the duty and responsibility to promote the health and wellbeing of all its citizens.

Australian homosexual activists have also acknowledged that their attempt to join heterosexuals in marriage is about legitimacy and acceptance. Consider the words of Rodney Croome: “this isn’t about sex, it’s about symbolism. Despite, or perhaps because of, an increase in de facto relationships and divorce, many Australians value marriage highly. For better or worse, it bestows on a relationship society’s ultimate seal of approval. This is why social conservatives deeply loathe marriage equality and why, as the inheritors of centuries of stigma, many same-sex couples yearn for it.” That is what Mr Croome and so many others want: social approval. That is why there is such a concentrated effort to redefine marriage by the homosexual lobby.

Indeed, the bottom line of all homosexual activism is ultimately just that: complete social acceptance and approval. As Kirk and Madsen put it back in 1989, “to gain straight tolerance and acceptance is not just a legitimate goal of gay activism, it must be the principal goal.”

Plenty of other homosexual activists have admitted as much. For example, same-sex marriage advocate Arthur Leonard put it this way: “Legal recognition of same-sex couples would have the effect over time of ‘normalizing’ such relationships. . . . Those who argue that the gay rights movement is out to transform society by getting people to view gay people as ‘normal’ are completely correct.”

Exactly. The activists realise that the majority will not acknowledge normalcy concerning the homosexual lifestyle, so they must resort to bypassing the public will and the legislative process, using instead the blunt instrument of judicial activism. It is the activist courts who are forcing the homosexual lifestyle on the rest of society, whether they like it or not.

As African-American Shelby Steele, in an article on why same-sex marriage is not a civil rights issue, rightly notes, “In the gay marriage movement, marriage is more a means than an end, a weapon against stigma. That the movement talks very little about the actual institution of marriage suggests that it is driven more by this longing to normalize homosexuality itself than by something compelling in marriage.”

Stanley Kurtz puts it this way: “Ultimately, it may be that what lies behind the demand for same-sex marriage, whether couched in conservative or in ‘civil-rights’ terms, is a bid to erase entirely the stigma of homosexuality. That bid is utopian; as radical gays like Michael Bronski acknowledge, the stigma arises from the fundamental separation between homosexuality and reproduction, which is to say from the fundamental fact that the world is, for the overwhelming part, heterosexual. Nevertheless, in pursuit of this utopian end, we are being asked to transform, at unknown cost to ourselves and to future generations, the central institution of our society.”

Or as family researcher Peter Sprigg has said, “The logical answer would seem to be that this campaign is not really about marriage at all. Instead, it is about the desperate desire of homosexuals for society at large to affirm that homosexuality (not just homosexual individuals, but homosexual sex acts) is the full equivalent of heterosexuality in every way – morally, socially, and legally.”

Quite so. What this is really all about is a major campaign of social upheaval, designed to bring the rest of an unwilling society into line with the demands of a very small but very vocal activist group. All this social engineering is about forcing the rest of the community to fully embrace the homosexual agenda and lifestyle, whether they want to or not.

[937 words]

32 Replies to “Why the Push for Homosexual Marriage?”

  1. Timely and trenchant article. Thank you Bill.

    These aggressive and mindless culture warriors have to be faced down on this last line – they’re full of passionate conviction because they must know secularism and the self sterilisation they advocate by its own logic is demographically self defeating – so they have to move fast. They’ll have Australia remade in their depraved image no matter what the megalomaniacal cost.

    Real political leadership, future oriented and hope filled, is quite simply to be just stewards of a beautiful institution for the sake of our boys and girls and future generations.

    Martin Snigg

  2. I just don’t understand why so many of God’s children choose this terrible lifestyle for themselves. What do they see in it? It’s just not normal.

    I have already decided that if my son, heaven forbid, ever told me he had decided to be gay, I would disown him, even though my heart would break. It’s my belief that this would be the most biblical response.

    Barbara Murray-Leach

  3. I will go one step further by saying I believe Satan is the force behind this movement. Satan wants to destroy the family. Divorce is already doing its damage, and gay marriage will deliver the final blow. Destroy the family, and you destroy the world.
    Jane Petridge

  4. Thanks Bill,
    There is no doubt that the militant homosexual lobby is a satanically devised scheme to attack our culture. It may also be a judgement for the weakness of the churches and their lack of faithfullness in preaching the truth and praying for our society…..But the gay community are not the enemy; they are the mission field (or part of it) and we should never forget that some of the heroes of the faith historically were moral reprobates before the grace and power of Jesus captured their hearts.
    Barbara if your loved one ever embraced this wicked lifestyle, just keep praying and sharing the truth in love. There is no one outside of the ability of God to grant repentance unto life.
    Glenn Christopherson

  5. Please play the video in this “Hold a hand day” link and listen to the useful but dangerous idiot, Shami Chakrabarti, (or should I say serpent) from Liberty, as she, without blushing, says that all Gays want is the liberty to hold hands:

    Roger Scruton, a victim himself of the gaystapo has interesting things to say about the importance of old fashioned stigma:

    David Skinner, UK

  6. Barbara, if you disowned your son, it would surely not be God in you that was doing it. Father God would have loved Hitler to his dying breath: if he had been willing to repent and call out to the Lord, the Lord would have received him, even after all the horrible things he had done to His chosen people. Father God loves sinners. He knows why they sin. He knew why my heart was so embittered towards my father when I was 25 and in the hippie scene, but He reached out to me and loved me. I couldn’t get over it. I thought “this love is amazing, I don’t want it to end”. In all my sin and filthiness, He reached out to me and loved me. With healing, wonderful life-affirming love. Now I am a grandfather at 61, and how blessed to be loved by Father God. It is Wonderful! We must love his creations, whatever they have done.
    Ian Brearley

  7. Don’t apologize Bill for the number of bulletins you issue. There is a lot going on and there is a lot which is going wrong in the world and you are one of the few putting up a fight.
    I believe that homosexuals might win their arguments with enough weak politicians, however the old analogy about leading a horse to water but you can’t make it drink is applicable with the general public. 1.9% of the population will not change the attitudes of a significant portion of the populous, even if they are bullied into keeping their mouths shut. My big worry is that the homosexuals will not be satisfied just with the important number of concessions you have listed, they will be satisfied only when laws are passed, which enable their critics to be jailed for criticising them. That will happen.
    Much of the western world, including Australia are having free speech eroded by a system of gradualism. Unless some drastic action is taken, our country will be eventually indistinguishable from the communist countries both of today and of a few years ago.
    Frank Bellet, Petrie Q

  8. Thanks Frank

    Yes you are absolutely right. The ultimate end of all this is the complete shutting down and silencing of any and all opposition to the homosexual lifestyle. Any critics of communism were shot or imprisoned. We seem to be slowly heading in that direction. It is not a question of if, but of when, unless we get our act together and start doing something about all this. Now it will be fines, imprisonment and loss of employment. Later it may be even more severe.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  9. Hi Bill.
    Just getting a little astray of the subject at hand – have just received an email from Ivanhoe Girls’ Grammar responding to mail I sent to them, in support of their stance in regard to one of their students being denied entrance to a school function because she attempted to bring along her lesbian partner.
    Well, according to the email the school DOES support same sex relationships and apparently same sex partners have been attending the schools’ Yr 12 functions for many years!!!!
    Well, surprise surprise!!!….furthermore, it goes on to say that they are ‘a diverse and supportive community which certainly supports all students, parents and staff in their life choices’.
    Just so sad that this is just another PC institution pandering to a very vocal minority as far as I’m concerned….

    Dianne McMahon, Blind Bight, Vic

  10. How any sane person can maintain that homosexual behaviour is normal and not a perversion or disorder, is beyond me. The political correctness that is ruining our culture must be stopped in its tracks. Wake up people!
    Homosexual “orientation” is one thing, but perverse sexual activity is another.
    Those who would change society to cater to this lifestyle are playing with fire.
    Jerome Gonzalez

  11. Frank and Bill, tell me, how long can Britain last with scenes like this taking place, in our council chambers, presumably up and down our country? I used to think collapse would come in twenty or ten years time. Perhaps we do not even have years. If you watch the video, it starts about 2hrs 20 in.


    Churchill, when trying to alert Parliament to the threat of Nazism, in 1938, said: “I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the Press, for it will be said – indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow the nazi system of dictatorship to be criticised by ordinary common English politicians. And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year, unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.”

    He could equally have said,
    I foresee and foretell that there will be restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the Press, for it will be said – indeed, I hear it said sometimes now – that we cannot allow homosexuality or its ideology to be criticised by ordinary politicians . And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year, unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.

    Well Mr Churchill that bitter cup is with us like never before and I fear that Britain has indeed lost the moral health and martial vigour to rise again and take its stand for freedom as in the olden times.

    The connection between Nazi fascism and homosexuality is brilliantly but reluctantly admitted by the gay journalist Johann Hari:


    David Skinner, UK

  12. Thanks Dianne

    Yes I received the same reply. And this is supposed to be an Anglican school! I am encouraging folk to write back to them and ask them some hard questions.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  13. Sadly, the demands of homosexuals signify the lengths the lost soul goes to to seek approval when the approval of the Father is rejected. As we know the desperate hunger of the human heart is only met when we come into the true dignity of knowing we are one of the Heavenly Father’s sons. As such we want to embrace His care in the way we live our lives for we want to do what pleases Him. Otherwise we will be lost to counterfeit loves and lifestyles. What a privilege and responsibility the church has to assert there is a way to walk which brings God’s approval and to lead those willing to know the way which brings God’s approval, acceptance, validation, recognition and correction.
    Arthur Connor

  14. So fundamental and radical are the changes to our society, the abandonment of our Judeo/Christian consciences, common sense and as Roger Scruton calls it our “social stigma” that was formerly opposed to adultery, murder, lying, slander, stealing fornication and sexual sins such as sodomy, and because the public has not yet had time to adjust to the new morality, the government has only one recourse in order to change society to conform to a gay ideology and that is to embark on far reaching, compulsory diversity training for all – from the child in the nursery to the elderly in the nursing home. However if the public is still unwilling to be convinced through what appears to be reason, argument and open debate, but which in fact is the repetition of mantras and unsubstantiated presuppositions, its preferred tool for change is fear. In this, the government has been spectacularly successful; by deliberately creating a climate of doubt and anxiety that puts the public at a severe disadvantage, we are totally dependent on the subjectivity of a magistrate or Attorney General. Never knowing whether what we will say will land us in court, we, the public have become compliant and silent. We are not prepared to gamble on being deemed homophobic when, with the threat of seven years in prison, the stakes are so high. This policy of creating doubt, uncertainty and unknowing is being deliberately and relentlessly pursued by our governments.

    However, as the public become more used to sexual liberty they too are conforming, especially amongst the younger, more impressionable generation. Hesitancy, modesty, self control, restraint, inhibition are giving way to complete hedonism and licentious living. There is no longer the need to use fear or threats to encourage to the public to conform to the sexual practices around them. But those who insist on chastity, purity, fidelity, modesty and all things Christian are stigmatised as hate filled and dangerous fanatics.

    David Skinner, UK

  15. Well Dianne & Bill, the Ivanhoe Girls’ school sent me 3 copies of the said e-mail. I am changing to a new e-mail address next year, consequently I receive e-mails in double. Why they sent me three I do not know. I was so surprised and disappointed, I thought they must have thought (incorrectly) that I was supporting the “gay side”. I was lucky that I was sitting down at the time.
    Frank Bellet, Petrie Qld

  16. In our efforts to defend our goal of resisting attempts by the GLBIT brigade to make incursions into marriage, I believe we have taken our eyes off the ball. One of the major objections to same-sex ‘marriage’ is that every child needs both a father and a mother for a successful upbringing. However, we appear to be overlooking the fact that in most States, adoption and surrogacy laws have already achieved that which we are trying to prevent. Is it time for a change in focus?
    Dunstan Hartley

  17. Thanks Dunstan

    Actually very few Australian states allow same-sex adoption and surrogacy rights at this point. But the issue is not to choose resisting one or the other battle (same-sex marriage, or adoption and surrogacy) but both, simultaneously. Both must be resisted. We don’t need to choose just one here. Both are crucial battlegrounds, and both must be fought to the full.

    Bill Muehlenberg, CultureWatch

  18. We do live in an age where stigma and morality no longer exist, in an age that prides itself for its non-judgementalism. People only become moral when they wish to attack those who are moral. Though espousing tolerance and non-discrimination as absolute virtues they are blatantly intolerant, judgemental, moral and discriminatory against those who do not tolerate evil.

    But we cannot be accused of being homophobic for, if we use the correct Greek definition of the prefix “homo, ” Homophobia would mean that we had a visceral hatred and fear of sexual relationships between people of the same kind – mankind (that includes two constituent parts: male and female). Homogenous, homosexual relationships therefore mean those that are uniform, stable harmonious, pure, alike, balanced, comparable, compatible, consistent, equal, same, solid, fixed, connected, continual, equable, even, firm, habitual, immutable, invariable, perpetual, steadfast, steady, together, unalterable, unbroken, constant, of a piece, true, undeviating, unfailing, even, unvarying, enduring, persistent, faithful, and dare I say complementary, – in the same way that a lock and key, plug and socket, man and woman form two constituent parts to form a complete whole.
    Check it out yourself with a thesaurus.

    Our gay and liberal accusers are therefore the ones who are homophobic. Not us.

    What can however be accused of is being heterophobic, for if we use the correct Greek definition of the prefix “hetero”, heterophobia would mean that we had a visceral hatred of sexual relationships that were antithetical to those which were homogenous and all of piece. Heterogeneous, heterosexual relationships are, according the dictionary and thesaurus, different, inconsistent, queer, disparate, conglomerate, discordant, diverse, perverse incongruous, inharmonious, mongrel, odd, complicated, promiscuous and motley compared with us straights, the homosexuals.

    Even straight sexual relationships can be amongst these queer heterosexuals for apart from lesbians, bisexuals, transexuals and transgender there are indeed those who are engaged in masturbation and even auto sodomy using a cast made from their own penises (the ultimate in gay sex). There are also multiple relationships for an indeterminate period of time, thus expanding the class of sexual behaviour and relationships into the polyamorous and polygamous – both straight and gay. However there are other groups wanting to join diversity legions such as those that are incestuous – both straight and gay. There are also paedophiles pushing for their human right for acceptance, both straight and gay (Tatchell et al). Beyond that are the zoophiles – both straight and gay. Finally there are the objectumsexuals – both straight and gay. The woman married to the Eiffel Tower is presumably a lesbian because its gender is feminine, la Tour Eiffel.

    We are not ashamed to call ourselves heterophobic; but unfortunately our adversaries, through self-induced insanity, are incapable or unwilling, to reason any longer.

    David Skinner, UK

  19. Bill and Frank
    I’ve been the lucky (??) recipient of 3 copies of the email as well, only though the 2nd one was marked as a recall??? (Not sure what that means..) Maybe they only realised after sending the 1st one that I was actually NOT supporting their TRUE stance at all and thought better of it……..then of course being so PC they decided to send another one anyhow, but the same one!!!!!
    They truly are confused……. as are all of the GLBIT brigade.
    Praise God we aren’t…..!!!!!!
    Aaaagh God bless ’em anyway.

    Thanks guys!

    Dianne McMahon

  20. I was surprised to hear Joe Hockey make a statement to end all statements from an alleged “conservative” politician. He stated that he was in favour of “same sex adoption, but not of same sex marriage”. The mind boggles and this fellow had or has ambitions of being Leader of the Opposition and possibly Prime Minister. I know I’ve been working very hard this week, but would someone please tell me if I must have been dreaming at the end of a busy day?
    Frank Bellet, Petrie Qld

  21. Bill, In reply to your mention of the excellent article by Dr David van Gend, in another section on your website and your request to write in if you could, in fact I wrote a letter in support of him. I also sent a copy of the said correspondence to my usual army of addresses. I had more responses from the addressees for that one letter than I have received collectively for the whole year. My letter was not published.
    Frank Bellet, Petrie Qld

  22. Hello Bill,
    My latest comment about same-sex marriage sent to the Sydney Daily Telegraph “Your Say” pages was not printed. I have never had a letter printed that appears to have Christian content. Yet other letters with just general comments have been printed. However, I will continue to send them until they print them.
    God bless.
    Paul de la Garde, Sydney

  23. I too got 3 apologist emails from Ivanhoe school – one sent, one recalled and the next, which looked identical, sent. It was weird to be part of the Australian experience that I have heard people on this site talk about. It was as if the thought police had told them to rectify their error. They said they have had same sex partners at a girls school dance in the past. When I was at a girls school we danced with female partners of necessity but there was no sexual intention.Then, “same sex” did not imply sexual activity. In fact I was told off for walking arm in arm with my best friend up the corridor at a time when we did have an emotionally close relationship, which wasn’t even a crush, but never dreamt of sexual contact. Sometimes I felt like the male element of a partnership being rather sporty but then she would become assertive and tell me that if I kept doing athletics my legs would end up looking like bottles! That was just part of adolescence and we both went on to pursue boys – albeit with restraint!
    I can’t imagine what it would be like to break through the taboo of becoming a lesbian but personally I find the idea abhorrent and predatory. It would do something dreadful to the way I think of myself and I would feel insulted if someone approached me for a lesbian relationship. Same sex is too incestuous. Some lesbians seem to assume the male role and adopt a mannish appearance and some homosexual men assume an effeminate role and the relationship becomes too possessive. I’ve tried to imagine myself embarking upon the same sex lifestyle to enlighten myself on what’s going wrong. Thanks to David Skinner for the insights. I still feel it’s something to do with the polarisation of men and women causing people to spurn the opposite sex and turn to their own sex for understanding. I think restraint, abstinence and self-discipline must be practised to a greater degree.
    Rachel Smith

  24. Hi I hope you are all writing to federal MPs as well. They need your support if they agree with you and a shake up if they don’t. And keep praying.
    Interesting that so many heterosexual people seem to have forgotten how important marriage is.

    Katherine Fishley

  25. Hi all
    Very good comments Bill and other contributors. We must keep the pressure on politicians. If Labor approves gay marriage our family will never vote Labor again. that’s the commitment we will make. That is the seriousness of the issue.

    That is the only thing they understand and should be driven home by all Christians, driven home to all pro gay politicians.
    Phil Browne

  26. Christians must stand their ground. The militant homosexuals are hoping that if they keep pressing for legal equality, then even some Christians will grow weary and want them to have it for the sake of peace.
    Graham Lawn

  27. Hi Bill, I have just read your article on online opinion on the marriage debate with homosexuals. I have written to all politicians in the 3 major parties to support marriage as it stands and have had scant replies. I agree with Frank Bellet and yourself and believe that we need to get the message out to the public of how a change in the laws will attack our freedoms; freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc, it will affect every law in some way. Do you intend to write an article on this fact alone as I think people need to hear about the consequences of a change to the laws associated with homosexual ‘marriage’ ie. jail.
    Anthony Quinn

  28. The push for gay/same sex marriage will not help to reach public approval from the straight community. In fact, it will have the opposite affect. No one likes being forced to do something, especially if they don’t like it. They will only resent it more. Just because the laws may change, it won’t change a person’s likes/dislikes. Having gay marriage passed is just that, the people who have disagreed will continue. Most importantly marriage is not about public recognition but more of a covenant with God. A gay marriage can not have a covenant with God because he is clearly is against it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *