As a response to my post, “Standing for the Truth on Gay Marriage” a correspondent who calls himself MyAtheistLife made an interesting argument. He argued that my post was equivalent to the Nuremberg Defence made by accused Nazi war criminals. “You are defending your Nazi warcrime of disapproving of homosexuality”, he is essentially saying, “by saying that it is okay because God told you to do it.” Aside from the obvious problems of comparing calling homosexuality a sin to a Nazi warcrime, there are a few other issues that I wanted to point out about this deeply flawed argument.
First of all, his argument calls his reading comprehension into serious question. I was not arguing that homosexuality is wrong because God said so (though this is clearly the truth and I certainly agree with that statement), I was arguing that God’s plan to teach mankind how to love one another requires sexual purity even if we don’t understand why this is necessary. I know this is a difficult concept and some of the details of what I meant were in linked posts that he did not read, but I think I made this point fairly clear.
Secondly, his argument demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of what happened at Nuremberg. At Nuremberg, Allied prosecutors sought to apply “natural law” that they argued superseded national laws arrived at by German consensus. In other words, the German war criminals were arguing that “we Germans determined that this behaviour was acceptable” and the Allied prosecutors countered that argument by saying that there was an absolute moral law which was higher than the law formed by German consensus. In the argument on gay marriage, those in the opposition are arguing that the universal consensus of mankind has always been that marriage between a man and a woman is the foundation of human societies and that homosexuality violates natural law. Those supporting gay marriage are arguing for the modern consensus of liberal Americans. MyAtheistLife is saying that I am in the position of the defendants at Nuremberg, when actually my position is far closer philosophically to the prosecutors at Nuremberg.
The bottom line here is that this is a philosophical disagreement. Since I believe that sex, marriage and the nuclear family are foundational to God’s plan to teach human beings to love one another, I believe that homosexuality and any other deviance from the sexual purity commanded by God is a sin. I cannot agree with proponents of gay marriage that heterosexual marriage is not part of the divine purpose because to do so means that there is no such thing as divine purpose and that everything is meaningless. If the closest, most intimate and most vulnerable relationships in our lives don’t have any meaning or natural order, then what in human life does have meaning or natural order? The position that nothing has meaning or natural order is philosophical nihilism and this is why I could never agree that homosexuality is okay. Support of homosexuality is a close cousin to nihilism in that it removes meaning and purpose from the most important aspect of human life. I cannot and will not support gay marriage because I am not a nihilist and I do not agree that human life has no purpose or meaning. MyAtheistLife accuses me of a Nazi warcrime because I take this stand, but this only demonstrates the deep confusion of his thinking.