Andrea, I never suggested that our marital relationship should supercede or replace our relationship with our Creator. But the Bible tells us that marriage is, itself, a “type” or representation of our relationship with God. As such, it is apparently an extremely important and valuable human relationship far beyond that between friends or acquaintances, and of far more import and value that casual sex.

The Biblical metaphors for marriage include becoming a part of one another, being drawn one from the other, and becoming “one flesh.” In that very Creation story to which you refer, God states that, “It is not good for man to be alone.” For us as human beings to contradict that idea and suggest that for persons with homosexual orientations, it is *best* that they be alone for their entire lives strikes me as quite a bit of hubris.

I know that God didn’t create me to be alone, and that God didn’t create me to be coupled with a man. The events of my life have made it abundantly clear that God created my wife and I to be partners and helpmates to one another. We bring the most glory to God when we honor God in one another and strive to live in a loving relationship which mirrors God’s love for all humanity.

If some other type of arrangement is working out for you, that’s fine. But that doesn’t change the fact that a gay person married to a straight person is not likely to find or provide much emotional commonality, and their emotional focus is highly likely to be more outside the marriage than inside it. Will having friends other than one’s spouse to meet emotional needs destroy a marriage? Of course not — not in and of itself. But if one member of the couple is forming his or her *primary* emotional bonds with someone other than his/her spouse, that’s a problem in my book.

I follow your logic and feel the strength of your argument, but it only holds if this assumption is uncritically subscribed to: “if our primary emotional gratification comes outside the marriage, are we truly fulfilling our vows to love and cherish one another?” Sometimes, sometimes not. I live and work in a culture where most people would chuckle and consider it extremely naive and immature to assume that marriage should carry this kind of burden. I suspect that many people throughout history would also. I’m one of the lucky ones who is very satisfied and grateful for my partner of 25 years. We probably wouldn’t have gotten to this point if expecting that our primary emotional gratification would come through our marriage had been a precondition at each stage of the journey.

I would like to say, though, that I was less comfortable with the latter portion of your post. It’s not that I don’t believe gay people have imperfections like straight people, nor that I dispute the idea that we should all accept and love one another, imperfections and all, but in these types of conversations it is too easy to fall into the mode of, “Well, we’re all sinners, after all. I should love you even though you sin, just like God does,” meaning that homosexuality should be regarded as a “sin,” but forgiven, just as we forgive one another and ourselves for lying, or cheating, or otherwise transgressing.

The fact is, I do not believe that homosexuality — feelings or practice — is inherently sinful (and would posit that the Bible does not represent it as such, either). The expression of one’s sexuality most certainly *can* involve sin. Any time we use sexuality to exploit or hurt, any time we are unfaithful to our promises and vows, our sexuality (gay or straight) can be an occasion of sin. But sexuality, faithfully expressed within the bounds of a committed, loving, monogamous relationship, is not sinful, whether between two people of the same sex or two people of the opposite. In fact, I would suggest that there is far more potential for sin when a person whose sexual orientation is homosexual attempts to suppress that innate orientation and marry someone of the opposite sex because they have been told that this is what God expects from them.

In such a marriage, not only is there an increased likelihood of one or both partners straying outside of the marriage for sexual gratification, but there are other, more subtle ways of being unfaithful, or exploitative, or harmful. Those who enter into such a relationship are also likely to seek their emotional fulfillment outside of the relationship — not that we all can’t have intimate friendships apart from our spouses, but if our primary emotional gratification comes outside the marriage, are we truly fulfilling our vows to love and cherish one another? And if we are persons who find it impossible to be truly emotionally intimate with a person of the opposite gender, what hope do we have of *ever* giving our spouse the loving friendship and intimacy which is their right to expect from their partner (not even including the physical intimacy of sex)?

Then there is the whole issue of how such a parental relationship will affect any children born into such a “marriage.” Many (most?) such marriages end in divorce because they are simply untenable over the long haul. And many of these marriages include little children who are then deprived of the stability and security of an intact home. Divorce is a terrible thing for children under the best of circumstances, but when people marry fully knowing they are unsuited to one another and unlikely to ever experience a fulfilling marital relationship, they are setting up their future children for disappointment, hardship and a fractured home. And even if the parents do not divorce, theirs will not likely be a relationship which demonstrates loving intimacy to their children.

Far better for gay people to find loving intimate partnerships with a person with whom they are physically, sexually and emotionally compatible, and with whom they can form lasting, fulfilling, committed relationships. Far better for gay people to raise their children in a loving marriage to someone of their own gender, with whom they can provide a stable, loving home for those children, and with whom they can model loving, committed relationships patterned upon Christ’s love for the church.

I’ve shared with you that I am often frustrated, because when we talk about the church and the LGBT community our “conversation” has a tendency to take the form of bullet point statements regarding scripture, natural order, sin, tradition, etc. As a former high school and college debater, I can assure you that that sort of discourse is far from conversational. In many ways, we might as well strap on the gloves and enter the ring, for our verbiage really can become rather violent.

That is why I am encouraged by this site and the conversations I see taking place here. First of all, just to have a forum to share honestly and question faithfully is a breath of air for those of us who have felt the desire to have this conversation for quite some time now. But perhaps more importantly, the conversation is more often than not framed in narrative rather than bullet point language, as is so beautifully evidenced by this particular post.

True, it takes more time and patience to converse in such a manner. But I am convinced that the only way we will become the gracious, merciful, loving, body of Christ God has called us to be is to move away from the pugilism of bullet points and proof statements, and move toward hearing and responding to one another’s stories.