Rebutting Rebuttals: Arguing Against “Marriage Equality”, Part 5.2

We return to the set of “rebuttals” set out in part 5 of Bob Seidensticker’s series, “20 Arguments Against Same Sex Marriage, Rebutted” in which Bob attempts to engage and respond to a series of arguments set out by Frank Turek both at his blog at CrossExamined and the Christian Post. 

We pick up with objection 14, “Don’t like divorce? Same-Sex Marriage will make it worse!”

Bob is responding to an argument made by Turek here regarding the effect of no-fault divorce, where he writes,

“Before no-fault divorce, one party in a marriage had to show that the other had committed adultery, abandonment, a felony, or a similar offense to get a divorce. Frank prefers those good old days.

Okay? And?


The divorce argument is, sort of, irrelevant to the question of the grounds and justification for marriage. Bob throws back to an earlier objection that I responded to here, so I’m not going to spend much time on it. I will respond to this though,

“Same-sex marriage is a celebration of marriage, not an attack.

Well, marriage is a celebration. The question is, what is it celebrating? 

The Christian answer is that it celebrates the work of God in creation and in redemption.  The way that it celebrates the former is through the joining of the two halves of humanity that are designated as the bearers of God’s likeness in whom rests the potential to bring new life into the world. In the latter, it represents the joining of Christ to his church in love and responsiveness. By definition, same-sex marriage rejects the mandate of creation, therefore it also rejects the redemptive imagery contained within it. Therefore it’s not a celebration of marriage but a mockery of it. 

We turn to rebuttal 15, Homosexuality causes health problems!

Bob begins his responds to Turek, in his Townhall article, by writing,

“Frank doesn’t want to hear that homosexual sex is about love.

Bob continues, 

“Presumably the issue…is AIDS…a sexually transmitted disease. Worldwide almost as many women as men are HIV positive.

Let’s just point out something obvious: that’s worldwide. When you expand your criteria it’s amazing how things even out. If we look at the available Centers for Disease Control data, for 2017, the vast majority of new infections in the US are from male-to-male (MTM) sexual contact, in fact, as the chart below indicates, there is no available data from male-to-female (MTF) in regard to category, until one moves down to heterosexual contact, and then the number is still 4 times higher in MTM than in MTF. Further, when you break down infection and diagnosis by race, Black Americans suffer at two-times the rate, even though they’re only 13% of the population. 

Screen Shot 2019-08-04 at 3.11.53 PM

The Mayo Clinic—not some right wing group— has an article on their website noting that, “…gay men and and men who have sex with men have some specific health concerns.” They link the specific behaviors of males specifically engaging in sexual behavior with other males to have issues that don’t affect males who don’t. A study conducted in 1980 revealed that male homosexuals, on average have over 100 sexual partners in their lifetime, many of them anonymous.(1) So, this seems to contradict that this is about “love” and is instead about “lust”. In fact, the best research on the question demonstrates that homosexual relationships, whether gay or lesbian, are significantly more unstable than heterosexual relationships.

Bob tries to derail this by claiming that Frank undermines his argument by stating that “…most of our loving relationships are non-sexual”. I agree, that part is unnecessary because the question is about marriage, and not the context of all human relationships. However, what the research does tell us is that once a sexual component is introduced into a relationship between two people of the same sex, the relationship becomes contentious, not only within itself, but externally with society. It can ultimately becomes abusive, destructive, and even predatory. What should be noted is that Bob doesn’t—better, he can’t—respond to Turek’s chief claim that homosexual behavior is harmful. The data, however, is on the side of Turek.

Turning to rebuttal 16, There goes free speech!

Bob goes after Turek’s argument in the third part of his Christianity Post series, writing dismissively,

“I suppose Frank’s breathless anxiety helps wind up his supporters, but Constitutional freedoms are still firmly in place. 

Well, let’s keep in mind that Frank wrote his article back in  May of 2014, and Bob updated his response in December 2018. Was Bob not paying attention when New York City amended its Human Rights Commission guidelines to compel speech as well as one in California. Bob’s challenge to Turek to provide, “any instance,” where it has been violated is literally a Google search away. The simple fact is that not only have valuable first amendment protections been violated in freedom of association, but freedom of speech.

Stay tuned for part six.


1. Lawrence Corey and King Holmes. “Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men—Incidence and Mechainsm”. New England Journal of Medicine, 1980 (302:435-438).

One comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s