Mike Judge
A spokesman for the Christian Institute responds to an article by John Dowie, who took issue with the institute's dismissal of homosexual marriage
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Marriage should maintain its protected status in law. If other human relationships are equated to marriage, then marriage ceases to have the privileged status it deserves. This strikes at the heart of family life.
Marriage should maintain its protected status in law. If other human relationships are equated to marriage, then marriage ceases to have the privileged status it deserves. This strikes at the heart of family life.
John Dowie attacked the Christian Institute's view of marriage as being un-Christian. However, his ideas appear to be based more on the minority views of political correctness than the long-understood teaching of the historic Christian faith.
Marriage is biological, not ideological. The Bible is clear on this. It is a God-given estate of life-long union of one man and one woman. The idea that this can be changed by the latest politically correct trend or by a party-conference vote is nonsense.
If the tie between marriage and biology is broken, then marriage itself becomes meaningless. If two men can marry, then why not three or four? In fact, why stop there? Why not allow people to marry their pet? Or their toaster?
It is on the basis of a tiny minority that the Lib Dem party conference voted to scrap the definition of Christian marriage. However, not only are these views nonsensical; they are dangerous. Turning our backs on traditional marriage is hazardous for society. As the Government itself states: "Marriage is the surest foundation for raising children and remains the choice of the majority of people in Britain."
The weight of research backs this up. As the ethical socialist Professor AH Halsey says, children raised outside (heterosexual) marriage tend to die earlier, have more illness, do less well at school, exist at a lower level of nutrition, comfort and conviviality, suffer more unemployment, be more prone to deviance and crime, and repeat the same cycle of unstable parenting that they themselves suffered.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments