Print
Recently, Robert Gates, the president of the Boy Scouts of America, said he believes the ban on openly gay leaders should be lifted.
“I truly fear that any other alternative will be the end of us as a national movement,” Gates said.
He cited the social, political and judicial changes taking place in this country regarding laws and sexual orientation, and said, “The status quo in our movement’s membership standards cannot be sustained.” The position he is taking is one of adopting what is cultural popular and acceptable — instead of what is traditionally and biblically accepted as truth.
To say that changes must be made in the Boy Scouts simply because of changes in society — when Scripture is clear on the issue — is to say that popular demand and cultural definitions hold more weight than the truth of God’s Word. If culture is more authoritative than Scripture, what is the point in having Scripture at all?
This issue not withstanding, there is another issue that needs to be addressed here: How are we to view the issue of homosexual couples raising and influencing children? The liberal left feels there is no issue here. To them, a child having two dads or two moms is no different than that same child having a mom and a dad. However, is there something in the Bible that can give us insight into whether or not a child needs a mom and a dad for their proper social development?
In the book of Genesis, God made man and the woman. God made the man first, and then said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gen. 2:18). It was this identified need that led to God creating the woman. God made them male and female and pronounced it as very good (Gen. 1:31). God also gave the man and the woman a command: Be fruitful and multiply (Gen. 1:28). He told them to procreate with one another and have families. He said this was very good.
God had a very intentional design behind his creative work. He intended for children to have a mother and a father — and that is why he made a man and a woman and commanded them to start the first family. Later, Jesus affirmed this.
To say that a child does not need a mother and a father is to say that God’s design was neither necessary nor correct. It is to say that we can do it better than God planned, and that there is no rhyme or reason for God’s creative design aside from one of preference. It is to ignore Scripture, thousands of years of human history, common sense and nature. A mother and father complement one another in childrearing, each bringing something unique to the family.
The argument that a child should have a mom and a dad is often met with the argument that the traditional family model does not always work; proponents of this objection point to the high divorce rates among heterosexual couples. The argument follows that if homosexual couples are able to be monogamous and in committed relationships, they are providing secure families for these children. However, this is based in a false presupposition. Divorce is the result of sin, not the result of a poor relational model. One cannot argue for the validity of their position based on the effects that sin has on the original design. Sin distorts God’s design, thus the problem of divorce is a sin issue, not a design issue.
The Apostle Paul called homosexuality unnatural and a refusal to acknowledge God (Rom. 1:26-27). It is unnatural because it goes against the natural design of God for a family to be made up of a man, woman and children. Discarding this design for something unnatural will lead to equally unnatural consequences. While it may seem like a harmless thing to have two men or two women raise a child, the deeper issue is the fact that God’s design is being discarded in the name of social change. This should never happen, regardless of popular demand.
Do you agree or disagree? Share your thoughts in the section below:
