Writer Pastor Eddie Thompson wrote an article at AuthorsDen.com making three arguments against same-sex marriage, two of which could be called secular.
First, gay and lesbians already possess rights equally protected under the law. They have the exact rights that I have today. They can marry a member of the opposite sex if they so choose, just like I have done. I can't marry a member of my own sex, even if I wanted to. So, we have the exact same rights.What they don't have is the right to marry the person that they have fallen in love with. What they don't have is the right to start and raise a family that person with the full legal assistance and protections that are enjoyed by those who are married. So no, gay men, lesbians, and bisexuals (such as myself), do not have the "exact same rights." What heterosexuals have is extra rights compared to homosexuals and bisexuals, which makes Thompson's next statement really wrong:
What is being suggested by the gay agenda is not "equal rights" but "extra rights."Not so much.
Moving on to Thompson's second point:
Secondly, consenting adults can do many things, but there are some actions restricted even to consenting adults.This is true, but those restrictions must be justified. If they are not, then those restrictions must be lifted.
[. . .] There are reasons we place restrictions on marriage. Homosexuals have never received marital status in the history of mankind until recently.Well, as a factual matter that's not entirely clear. It's also irrelevant. As we've developed as a society and a species, we've come to realize that many things that we've done historically should not have been done, such as the oppression of women, slavery, segregation, etc. Tradition is not a sufficient reason to continue with any practice, not when there are good reasons to stop.
There is a reason for that. It is not productive to continue to shred the fabric of our society. The burden of proof for changing history’s traditional marriage should fall upon the supporters of the homosexual agenda.How is allowing same-sex marriage going to "shred the fabric of our society"? If changing what we do and accept as a society in the interest of fairness, equality, and justice is "shred[ding] the fabric of our society," then I say shred away. As for the burden of proof, we've met that. The burden is now with those against same-sex marriage.
I have heard of no compelling reasons that suggest homosexual marriages are necessary to the well-being of our society.I have heard of no compelling reasons to believe same-sex marriages are harmful to society, or that denying same-sex marriage is somehow "necessary to the well-being of our society." Indeed, a number of states and countries have been permitting same-sex marriage or civil unions (not the same thing, I know) for years, and those societies still exist.
Pastor Thompson's final argument is basically a religious one, and as such, I'm not going to deal with it in detail, except for one line, because it bugs me:
They want us to validate something we consider wicked.Just as those who agree with Pastor Thompson want us to validate something we consider wicked: the supremacy of heterosexual marriage over any other form of marriage between consenting adults.