Same-sex marriages and segregation

I’m sure you’ve heard the argument: A Christian who refuses to support  same-sex marriage is like a business owner in the segregated South who refused to serve black people. If you refuse to use your skill to profit off something that you find sinful, so the argument goes, are you not exactly like those businesses that turned African-Americans away?

Here are two real-life examples: there was a baker in Oregon who refused to make a cake for a same-sex wedding. The Oregon Labor Commission found that this was illegal discrimination. The baker was forced to go out of business, or face fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars. He ended up closing his doors.

Then there was the photographer in New Mexico who was asked to shoot a same-sex wedding. She refused, basically saying because she thought the marriage was sinful, she was not sure her pictures would present the ceremony in the best light, so to speak (she in turn recommended other photographers who could do the wedding). The New Mexico Supreme Court found her guilty of “human rights violations” by discriminating.

By refusing to promote the same-sex weddings, are these businesses discriminating illegally? Well—yes. At least according to the Supreme Court in New Mexico and the Labor Commission in Oregon. But is this morally the same thing as those who discriminated against people on the basis of skin color? Absolutely not. Here are three reasons why:  

First, the businesses were not discriminating against people, but against an act that they found sinful. In other words, these businesses all served homosexual customers for years without refusing. The photographer in New Mexico told the New York Times that she would “gladly serve gays and lesbians” by doing portraits or other work. It was only when she was asked to use her services to promote a certain event that she refused. These owners did not discriminate against a person, but instead simply refused to violate their consciences by promoting a wedding that they found immoral.

Second, and most importantly, the distinction between racial discrimination and same-sex marriage is a moral one. The Scripture condemns racial discrimination (eg. Gen 1:27, John 7:24, Acts 10:34-35, Romans 10:12, 2 Cor 5:16, Gal 3:28, Eph 6:9, James 2:9). The Scripture also condemns homosexual actions (Lev 18:22, 20:13; Rom 1:26-28, 1 Cor 6:9-11, 1 Tim 1:10, Heb 13:1-5, Jude 7). So the discriminating owners in the segregated south and the religious business owners in a post-gender America are on two opposite ends of the moral spectrum.  But typical of our culture, we have become completely adept at confusing something that is immoral with something that is moral.

Third, there is the element of human nature and dignity. One of the reasons racial discrimination was so wrong is because it had as its goal the denial of basic human dignity to people based on their ethnicity. But saying that you believe that marriage is between a man and woman is not a denial of the human dignity of either (Gen 1:27, Matthew 19:4-5, Mark 10:6-9, 1 Cor 7:2). Instead, it is an affirmation that the genders were created differently and uniquely by God.

Beyond those reasons, there is the element of speech. Taking pictures at a ceremony or making a cake for a wedding are active forms of positive expression. It is not a coincidence that the first lawsuits of this kind were designed to compel people to make an expression that celebrates something they find sinful. The point is that people who are redefining marriage are not after wedding cakes as much as they are after affirmation–and the legal system is more than willing to compel religious people to speak in favor of gay marriage, or lose their businesses all together. There really is no parallel to that in the segregated South.

There is a current case working its way through courts in Colorado with a different baker who was sued for refusing to make a cake for a same-sex wedding. He was found guilty and liable by the State Civil Rights Commission. It has been suggested that the best course of action for bakers, photographers, florists and the like is that they accept these jobs, and simply do a sub-par job at them. In other words, take their money and deliver an inadequate product—that will teach them! But has anyone ever heard of someone doing that? The truth is, Christians care more about providing a good product (as we glorify God by how we work) than avoiding lawsuits.

It is definitely time that Christians come to terms with the concept that our legal system is not interested in protecting our freedom to live and work in a way that is in keeping with biblical ethics. More and more people are being forced to choose between finding themselves on the wrong end of legal judgments and violating their basic sense of morality. When you find yourself in that situation, don’t compromise. There is a fate worse than a fine—and it has nothing to do with the hollow judgments of labor boards and human rights commissions.

Is It Sin to Experience Same-Sex Attraction?

There is no way around it. Dealing with same-sex attraction is messy.

There are many issues that, at least on the surface, do not seem clear. Take this question, for example: Is same-sex attraction (SSA) itself sinful, and if so, how should we deal with it?

Here is my humble attempt at an answer.

First, note briefly three biblical observations:

1. The Bible explicitly says that impenitent homosexual acts, not homosexual desires, keep a person from inheriting the kingdom of God. “Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God” (1 Corinthians 6:9–10).

2. The Bible does not seem to explicitly mention same-sex attraction. It is possible that the “dishonorable passions” in Romans 1:26 could be dealing with SSA, but it’s unclear whether this is a reference to simply experiencing an attraction, or following the attraction into active lusting.

3. Our passions may be disordered by the fall of this creation, and yet be distinct from active sinning. Paul said, “the creation was subjected to futility . . . [and will one day] be set free from its bondage to corruption” (Romans 8:20–21). Even Spirit-filled believers groan under this “futility” and “corruption,” including “dishonorable passions.” “We ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Romans 8:23).

Given the above three realities, it seems right to say that while homosexual practice is active sinning, the experience of same-sex attraction need not involve active sinning. John Piper says it like this:

It would be right to say that same-sex desires are sinful in the sense that they are disordered by sin and exist contrary to God’s revealed will. But to be caused by sin and rooted in sin does not make a sinful desire equal to sinning. Sinning is what happens when rebellion against God expresses itself through our disorders (“Let Marriage Be Held In Honor,” emphasis added)

In other words, although SSA is a disordered desire, owing to the fall and thus rooted in sin and broken by sin, nevertheless experiencing SSA is not in itself an act of sinning.

I mean at least two things when I say that experiencing SSA is not in itself an act of sinning.

First, experiencing a general orientation is not a sin.

In our sin nature, all of us are disordered sexually. My sexuality is disordered in that I experience a homosexual orientation. What I mean is that my sexual desires are exclusively “oriented” toward the same (homo) sex. This is true of me whether or not I am experiencing a specific attraction at any given moment. As I sit here writing, I am not experiencing an attraction to another man, but I am still exclusively attracted to men. So at this moment, though I have a homosexual orientation, I do not believe I am sinning in this regard.

Second, experiencing a specific same-sex attraction is not necessarily a sin.

Let’s say that I experience an attraction to another man. I don’t go looking for it, but it rises up spontaneously within me. At this point, my attraction falls into the category of temptation, and I can do one of two things. I can fight the desire in the same manner that anyone who is tempted with pride, jealousy, or fear would, and kill it before I sin. Or I can follow the desire into lust of the mind and eventually the flesh, which is a volitional sin.

When I look at another male and experience the butterflies of attraction, I must lay the desire for inappropriate activity with him at the feet of Jesus, and turn toward the superior promises of reward found in pursuing righteousness. If I do this, even though I have experienced the disordered groan of a broken creation, I have not sinned.

However, a word of caution might be helpful here.

There clearly is a biblical category for being tempted without sinning. Jesus was tempted in every respect, yet remained without sin (Hebrews 4:15), and James 1:14–15 distinguishes between temptation that leads to sin, and sin itself. However, it seems impossible to determine when exactly we have crossed the line from temptation into sin.

For example, how long can I experience the desire before I fight it, and still be blameless? Two seconds? Ten seconds? Half a second? Because Jesus is God, he never crossed the line between temptation and sin — though he knew the agony. But because I am finite and fallen, I cannot definitively discern this line.

Therefore, even though it is possible to be tempted without sinning, it seems wise to agree with David when he says, “Who can discern his errors? Declare me innocent from hidden faults” (Psalm 19:12). I always want to say to the Lord, “If there was any sin in the way I handled that temptation, I am sorry. Keep me from it in the future.”

In summary, SSA is the result of a broken creation, and in that sense it is “sinful” or “dishonorable” (Romans 1:26). It is an effect of the fall. However, experiencing SSA is not the same as sinning. Rather, same-sex attractions should be treated like any temptation to sin. They should be fought with blood-earnestness in a way that recognizes the deceitfulness of the heart and the finitude of the mind.

When I do this — when I fight temptation, turn to Jesus, trust his promises, and rely on his Spirit — God is pleased. He is not mainly displeased because I need to fight, but pleased because I am fighting.

This is good news for all of us who experience all manner of temptations! May this fact lead us, no matter our particular groaning, to rest in Jesus more deeply, fight temptation more fiercely, and look forward to the day when our fight of faith will result in “praise and glory and honor at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:7).

An Alternative Script for Same-Sex Attraction

“There is nothing wrong with living a gay lifestyle. In fact, if you repress who you are, you will never live a happy, fulfilled life. Be true to yourself!”

This is the overwhelming message of society regarding homosexuality. Mark Yarhouse refers to this as “the gay script,” the blueprint for how homosexuals are to live. “Embrace who you are,” a swelling number shout, “and you will find happiness!”

I disagree, but I must confess that there is a part of me that finds this script appealing. As long as I can remember, I have experienced exclusive same-sex attraction (SSA). Despite counseling and countless prayers, God has not seen fit to change my orientation.

So, if I am honest with myself, I would like the freedom to act on what seems to be basic and natural desires for intimacy, companionship, and love. After all, many of my straight friends find fulfillment and joy in finding a mate — why shouldn’t I?

Many Christians answer this question by appealing to the prohibitions of Scripture. They point to the Bible’s clear teaching that homosexual activity is sinful because it goes against the grain of the created order (Genesis 2:18, 23–24), and is therefore outside the boundaries God has set for acceptable sexual expression (Romans 1:27; 1 Corinthians 6:9–10).

Christians are right to appeal to the authority of the Bible for the manner in which we should conduct our lives (2 Timothy 3:16). However, if prohibition is the only message that those with homosexual desires (Christian and non-Christian) hear from the church, then our message is incomplete.

What the church needs is an alternative script. And it must be a holistic script that accounts for the real emotions and desires of those with SSA. We can’t live a life of only saying, “No!” to our desires. We need to be able to say “Yes!” to something greater, something better.

The most basic — and the most glorious — thing that I have said “Yes!” to is Jesus. The joys of following Jesus are everlasting and complete (Psalm 16:11; Mark 10:29) and make the temporary promises of sin seem woefully lacking. However, following Jesus does not make my yearnings for human intimacy and companionship magically disappear. What does Christianity have to say to those areas?

We must take this question seriously if we want the church to be a welcoming, appealing place where those who struggle with SSA can thrive. Here are three areas of church life that are particularly important to cultivate.

1. Our Self-Identity

The way we talk about those with homosexual desires matters if we want them to feel welcome in the church. Do we talk as if it is “us” and “them”? Have we made “being gay” such an atrocity that “those people” are out of the reach of grace?

The reality is that it is not “those people” that we are talking about. We are within the church, among the many people who experience broken sexuality but have the righteousness of Jesus credited to our account. We belong in the Body just as much as any other sinner who trusts Jesus. The church must be a place where those wrestling with SSA feel welcome, included, and safe to work out our salvation in the Lord.

2. Our Theology of Singleness

If we are going to ask those who struggle with SSA to reject their longings for as long as the Lord wills, then we must have a strong theology of singleness that does not present it as simply a transitional stage on the way to marriage. It seems that in many churches, marriage is assumed for everyone, and when it doesn’t happen for certain people, they are left wondering if the church is a place where they can truly belong.

This is not how the Bible views singleness. Jesus says that those who can accept singleness for the Kingdom should (Matthew 19:12), and Paul speaks shockingly highly of singleness in 1 Corinthians 7:8. Indeed, singleness can be a wonderful thing that mirrors our relationship with Jesus in a way that marriage cannot.

Singleness should be celebrated, not downplayed. As Peter Hubbard writes in Love into Light, “Single Christians living in purity and community are billboards for the sufficiency of Jesus.” Which leads to a third area.

3. Our Depth in Community

Where can an SSA struggler fulfill longings for real relationships and close companionship in God-glorifying ways? In rich Christian community. Eve Tushnet talks about Christian community this way:

If we took friendship seriously as a potential site of devotion and sacrifice, far fewer people would feel neglected and unwanted. If we considered lay community life (“intentional communities”) more seriously, and if we expanded our concept of family and welcomed single people into familial homes (for a season or for life), many more people could have the experience of living in a realistic familial love in which we all come first at times, and nobody is just there as support personnel.

What if this was the main message that those with SSA received from the church? What if they heard not simply, “Don’t have that relationship!” but, “You are welcome in the church, and in all these relationships, and we will seek to support you in your walk of faith with community, loving relationships, and hospitality”?

That is the beginnings of a wonderful alternative script.

Where Same-Sex Attraction Originates; and Where It Ends

Same-sex desires and same-sex orientation are part of our broken and disordered sexuality owing to the God’s subjection of the created order to futility because of man’s sin.

In Genesis 2 we read about the catastrophic moment when the first man and woman rebelled against God. The effects on them and on the world are described in chapters 2 and 3, and then illustrated in the sin-soaked and death-ridden history of the Old Testament, indeed all of history.

The apostle Paul gives the key interpretation of what happened there and its effect on us. Here's his key word from Romans 8:20–21: “The creation was subjected to futility [this is God's response to human rebellion], not willingly, but because of him who subjected it, in hope [so this is God who did this. The devil didn't subject it to hope. God cursed creation. We read that in Genesis 3] 21 that the creation itself will be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God."

And then, maybe one of the most important verses in the Bible for my understanding of almost everything I deal with in the brokenness of my life, my marriage, my children, this church, this world. Romans 8:23, goes like this. . . , and the point is that Paul is looking at the Romans in the face, as it were, who are about to say back to him, "Oh yes, the curse fell on the world and the whole creation was subjected, but we have been redeemed!" And here's his response to that:

And not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies. (Romans 8:23)

And I am arguing that same-sex desires and same-sex orientation are in that category of groaning — waiting for the redemption of our bodies. Which means they are in the same broad category with all kinds of disordered bodies and minds and emotions.

If we tried to make a list of the emotional and mental and physical brokenness of the human family the list would be unending. And all of us are broken and disordered in different ways. All of you, without exception, are bent towards desiring what you ought not to desire. I could document mine. Desires. We have not gotten to behavior yet. We are all disordered in our emotions, or minds, our bodies. We groan. We groan! And the damage we do waiting. Waiting for our final, full, complete adoption — the redemption of our whole bodies, brains, emotion, will.

This is a call for careful distinctions lest you hurt people — or yourself — unnecessarily. All our disorders — all our brokenness — is rooted in sin, original sin and our sinful nature. All of it. But, to be caused by a sinful nature, and rooted in sin, doesn't make a disorder equal to sinning.

Let me say it a little differently, because our language here just has to be so careful. It is not wrong, but I think proper to say, all of our disordered desires that are going after things we shouldn't go after are sinful desires — sinful meaning they are rooted in sin, and they are contaminated and disorderd, they're bent.