Equal Persons, Unequal Acts


Those pushing the redefinition of marriage insist that all they want is equality. After all, aren’t persons with same-sex attraction equal as human beings to those without. Why should they be discriminated against?

Of course they are human beings with all the rights of other human beings. The problem is not that the people aren’t equal, but that the acts aren’t equal. Those defending marriage don’t like to get explicit, but sometimes it is necessary. The intimate acts engaged in by two people of the same sex are not equal to the marital union. Those acts do not unite two persons in one flesh in an action in which each participates with their full personhood as male or female. A man engaged in sexual union with a woman is acting as a man, a woman as a woman.

The acts engaged in by two persons of the same sex are acts which one person does to another, not with the other as equals. To be graphically blunt, homosexual acts engage the genitals of only one of the partners at a time. The acts engaged in by two persons of the same sex, even if engaged in by a male/female couple, would not consummate a marriage.

The acts engaged in by two persons of the same sex cannot conceive a child who is the genetic heritage of their union in the flesh. The fact that male/female sexual unions make babies and babies are the future of every nation is the reason why governments have a vested interest in preserving and protecting marriage. Studies show that being raised by one’s married biological mother and father is associated with the best chance of a positive outcome for the children.

Those defending marriage don’t really want to talk about what same sex couples do in bed, so we talk about tradition and the way it has always been. But it is traditional and has always been this way because people understood the biology of sexual intimacy.


About Author