Marriage & Family Diversity
OVERVIEW
Religious definitions of marriage as solely between a man and a woman, rooted in heteronormative biases and scripture, require challenge in light of evolving societal values and interpretations of religious texts.
Progressive theological stances advocate for marriage equality for all consenting adults, regardless of sex, recognizing love's transcendence of biological limitations.
Growing acceptance of diverse marital relationships among younger generations signals a future decline in political opposition to pansexual marriage ethics.
The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision, mandating nationwide recognition of same-sex marriage, represents a landmark legal alignment with principles of equality and human rights.
Analysis of the original Greek in Leviticus 20:13 indicates a prohibition of adult male child sexual abuse, not consensual same-sex relations, debunking its use in discriminatory political agendas.
Interpretations of Romans 1:26 condemning same-sex relations as "unnatural" fail to consider the Greek term's meaning of "instinct," highlighting the political coercion inherent in forcing LGBTQ+ individuals into heteronormative constructs.
High divorce rates linked to infidelity necessitate a re-evaluation of legally restricting marriage to monogamy; recognizing polyamorous unions could offer a politically viable framework for diverse relationship structures.
While religious perspectives on marriage are relevant, the U.S. civil government holds legal authority, as affirmed by Supreme Court rulings and legal precedent.
Imposing the traditional heteronormative family structure as a political ideal disregards the rights and lived realities of those for whom it is not congruent.
Progressive theology's affirmation of LGBTQ+ marriage as valid reflects a politically inclusive understanding of diverse loving connections and human adaptability.
Historically, religious institutions fueled discriminatory laws against interracial families based on biased interpretations of religious texts.
While some biblical passages were used to oppose interracial marriage, texts like Galatians 3:28 offer a powerful message of equality that undermines such discriminatory political stances.
The historical religious opposition to interracial marriage is a politically discredited and prejudiced position, exposed by evolving moral standards and inclusive interpretations of scripture.
Legal recognition and theological inclusion of polyamorous family structures are necessary, demanding a political and religious re-evaluation of traditional doctrines to embrace diverse, consensual relationships.
Legally recognizing polyamorous families would provide essential stability and well-being, while spiritual communities can adopt inclusive principles of love and mutual care, influencing public policy.
————————————————————————
Marriage & Family Diversity
RELIGIOUS HISTORY IN DEFINING MARRAGE
Traditional religious interpretations of marriage have historically centered on a union between one man and one woman (Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:4-6). It is crucial to recognize that contemporary religious traditions largely originate from historically heteronormative cultural contexts. Consequently, these traditional foundations, rooted in male-female unions, have led to a persistent defense of heteronormative concepts within religious institutions. This vigilance stems from the concern that altering the definition of marriage could potentially destabilize established theological frameworks and challenge doctrines perceived as foundational and cohesive. Religious institutions have robustly defended traditional understandings of marriage and family structures (Ephesians 5:22-33, 1 Corinthians 7:2-16), a stance that, in this analysis, has inadvertently hindered a more comprehensive understanding of the constitutive elements of loving families and legitimate marriages.
WHO SHOULD GET MARRIED
Drawing upon progressive theological perspectives, my analysis asserts that the institution of marriage should not be exclusively defined as a union between a cisgender male and a cisgender female. Rather, it is argued that a pansexual understanding of marriage aligns more comprehensively with the theological principle that the Divine Creator has endowed human beings with the capacity for love that transcends biological sex. Objections to this inclusive view often originate from religious ideologies that fear the extension of marital rights beyond the heterosexual framework will legitimize harmful and predatory practices, a concern that ironically overlooks the historical and contemporary prevalence of child marriage, including within biblical texts. This perspective advocates for marriage as a civil institution accessible to all fully consenting adults, irrespective of biological sex, gender expression, or sexual orientation.
Pansexual understandings of marriage have gained traction in recent history. Younger generations exhibit statistically greater acceptance of non-heteronormative marital relationships. As older generations are succeeded by cohorts demonstrating increased openness towards love and inclusivity within marriage, it can be posited that within generational shifts, ideologies opposing pansexual marriage ethics will likely diminish, potentially disappearing entirely within subsequent generations. It is therefore incumbent upon progressive religious leaders and the broader public to persist in advocating for the right of all individuals to love one another and enter into marital unions.
In 2015, the United States Supreme Court, in the Obergefell v. Hodges case, issued a ruling mandating that all fifty states recognize and permit same-sex marriage. This decision represented a significant inflection point in public discourse and posed considerable challenges for individuals adhering to heteronormative Christian understandings of marriage. However, this pivotal moment can be interpreted as the nation aligning itself with divine principles. It was through this ruling that a collective understanding emerged, prioritizing the flourishing of all individuals in loving relationships above the restriction of a fundamental expression of human affection. This constitutes both a theologically significant and historically liberating event.
THE BIBLE SAYS…
Christian scripture has been historically and continues to be employed as a tool for systemic oppression against individuals seeking to marry outside heteronormative arrangements. A critical analysis of commonly cited biblical passages is necessary to contextualize their interpretation within contemporary understandings of human sexuality and relationship, moving beyond weaponized applications that marginalize specific populations.
Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall surely be put to death; their blood is upon them.
A critical hermeneutic of Leviticus 20:13 necessitates an engagement with its Greek context. The term "man" (אִישׁ, ʼîysh) translates literally to an individual adult male, while "laying with" (שָׁכַב, shâkab) implies a potentially abusive sexual dynamic characterized by power imbalance and coercion. Notably, disparities arise in translation concerning the second individual involved. The Greek term (זָכָר, zâkâr) primarily denotes a male child. Consequently, a contextualized reading suggests the passage proscribes adult male sexual abuse of a minor rather than consensual same-sex relationships between adults. Relying solely on English translations risks a misinterpretation rooted in Levitical law, potentially leading to homophobic conclusions. A rigorous understanding mandates scrutiny of the source languages to accurately discern the passage's intent within its historical and linguistic milieu.
The Greek word תּוֹעֵבַה (tôwʻêbah), translated as "abomination" in English Bibles, accurately describes coercive pedophilia as a fundamental violation of ethical sexual behavior. This understanding refutes anti-LGBTQ+ theology and public policy that invoke the "slippery slope" argument. LGBTQ+ individuals find the notion that loving, consensual same-sex relationships would lead to such depravity abhorrent.
ON NATURE
Research on LGBTQ+ identity formation suggests a complex interplay of biological and environmental factors, with a growing consensus emphasizing innate predispositions. The lived experiences of individuals reporting same-sex attraction, gender variance, or romantic inclinations towards those of the same or a trans identity often describe these feelings as intrinsic aspects of their being, a perspective supported by the lack of empirical evidence for the efficacy of sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts. While some conservative theological interpretations frame homosexuality as a volitional "struggle," many LGBTQ+ individuals perceive their identities as natural and immutable. Interpretations of Romans 1:26 that label same-sex relations as "unnatural" in English translations warrant closer scrutiny of the original Greek term φυσικός (physikós), which conveys the concept of instinct. Forcing LGBTQ+ individuals into heteronormative frameworks is often experienced as incongruent with their deeply felt sense of self. Furthermore, a nuanced hermeneutic suggests that certain biblical condemnations of same-sex acts may be contextualized within critiques of non-consensual or exploitative sexual behaviors χρῆσις (chrēsis) rather than consensual same-sex relationships.
HOW MANY CAN MARRY
Polyamorous unions should be legally recognized within marriage, granting them the same rights to establish familial structures as monogamous unions. Given the significant contribution of infidelity to divorce rates (approximately 50% for first marriages and 67% for second marriages in 2024), the rationale for restricting marriage to monogamous relationships warrants critical examination. It is plausible that legally acknowledging and accepting open or polyamorous marital arrangements could mitigate the 25% of divorces attributed to infidelity. Historical precedents for male polygyny within the Christian faith and various cultures, though situated within patriarchal frameworks, demonstrate that religious tenets are not inherently opposed to polygamous conjugations.
Acknowledging the prevalence of polyamorous relationships is essential. Research conducted in Canada and the United States reveals that 17% of survey participants express a desire for polyamorous marriage structures, with 11% presently engaged in such arrangements. Considering the substantial number of marital unions exploring polyamory and the expanding scholarly discourse on ethical and consensual extramarital relationships, it is imperative to deliberate on the legal and spiritual recognition of these unions. Granting them legal status and representation within religious institutions and before the divine as fully legitimate relationships merits serious consideration.
CHURCH V. CIVIL OWNERSHIP OF MARRIAGE
The ownership and administration of marriage are subjects of ongoing scholarly discussion. While numerous individuals of religious conviction assert that marital unions are divinely ordained and ecclesiastical bodies possess the authority to govern them, the civil government of the United States holds legal jurisdiction over this institution. This is substantiated by adjudications of the United States Supreme Court and prevailing legal practice. Ecclesiastical organizations are not legally empowered to issue marriage licenses or effectuate dissolutions of marriage; the termination of a marital union within the United States mandates the participation of a judicial officer appointed by the state. Consequently, while religious organizations may be authorized by governmental authorities to conduct marriage rites, the ultimate responsibility for, and regulatory oversight of, marriage rests with the state. Although the concept of marriage is delineated in religious texts, it does not constitute an institution established or governed by religious bodies.
FAMILY STRUCTURES
The traditional heteronormative family structure, characterized by a cisgender male and female engaging in procreation, is frequently regarded as the ideal within specific religious doctrines. While acknowledging its validity, it is imperative to recognize that imposing this model on individuals for whom heteronormativity is incongruent with their intrinsic nature is inappropriate. Although concerns are raised regarding reproduction, particularly given contemporary medical and situational solutions, it must be noted that heteronormative marriage does not constitute the exclusive means of reproduction within society. Nonetheless, it is essential to affirm that heterosexuality, as an individual's inherent sexual orientation, represents a legitimate family structure and a valid choice.
Progressive theology offers a lens through which to understand human sexuality that moves beyond traditional, often exclusionary, interpretations. Viewing LGBTQ marriage through this lens allows for its affirmation as a valid and meaningful expression of human experience, reflecting the diverse ways in which individuals form deep, loving connections. These unions stand as powerful testaments to the enduring strength and adaptability of the human spirit, highlighting the innate capacity for love, commitment, and mutual support that transcends sexual orientation and gender identity. Furthermore, the formation of LGBTQ marriages can be seen as a manifestation of divine co-creation, with individuals actively participating in the creation of loving and committed relationships that enrich their lives and communities.
While traditional understandings of marriage often emphasize biological procreation as a primary purpose, a Progressive theological perspective recognizes the multifaceted nature of human flourishing and the myriad ways in which families are formed and nurtured. Although same-sex couples may not procreate biologically, the creative and innovative spirit inherent in the divine is evident in the alternative means by which they build families, providing care, love, and support to one another and often to children through adoption, fostering, or other forms of kinship. The ability of LGBTQ+ individuals to establish and maintain thriving familial units underscores the fundamental human need for connection, belonging, and the shared experience of life's joys and challenges. These families, like all families, are capable of providing environments where individuals can grow, learn, and experience the fullness of human love and connection. Recognizing and affirming LGBTQ marriage as a legitimate expression of human experience and a reflection of divine creativity contributes to a more inclusive and just understanding of love, family, and the diverse ways in which humanity reflects the image of the divine.
Religious institutions have historically voiced significant opposition to the formation of interracial families, often rooted in interpretations of religious texts and prevailing social norms. This opposition manifested in various forms, ranging from social disapproval and exclusion to the formalization of discriminatory laws. In the United States, the legal battle surrounding interracial marriage spanned centuries, culminating in the landmark 1967 Loving v. Virginia Supreme Court decision, which finally declared state laws prohibiting interracial marriage unconstitutional. Prior to this pivotal ruling, numerous states maintained laws criminalizing such unions, reflecting deeply entrenched prejudices and discriminatory beliefs.
Throughout history, religious arguments have been employed to justify the prohibition of interracial relationships. Within certain interpretations of Judeo-Christian scripture, specific passages were invoked to support the separation of groups. Notably, Deuteronomy 7:3-4 cautions the Israelites against intermarrying with the inhabitants of the land, fearing that such unions would lead them astray from their religious obligations. Similarly, Exodus 34:15-16 warns against forming covenants and intermarrying with the local populations to prevent the adoption of foreign religious practices. These passages, taken out of their historical and cultural context, were often utilized to construct theological arguments against interracial marriage, portraying it as a transgression against divine law and a threat to religious purity.
However, alternative theological perspectives within Christianity offer a starkly contrasting view. Galatians 3:28 presents a powerful message of unity and equality within the Christian faith, stating that in Christ, there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, neither male nor female, for all are one in Christ Jesus. This verse fundamentally challenges hierarchical distinctions and advocates for a radical inclusivity that transcends racial and ethnic boundaries. When applied to the issue of interracial marriage, Galatians 3:28 strongly suggests that such unions are not only permissible but are also consistent with the core principles of Christian belief, which emphasize love, acceptance, and the breaking down of societal barriers, which became legally recognized in 1976 in the U.S.
The historical Christian opposition to interracial marriage stands as a demonstrably flawed and prejudiced position when viewed through the lens of evolving moral understanding and the inclusive message inherent in scriptures like Galatians 3:28. The perpetuation of discriminatory practices based on race contradicts the fundamental Christian tenets of love, compassion, and the inherent dignity of all individuals, regardless of their ethnic or racial background. Further, employing religious texts to justify racial segregation and the denial of fundamental rights reflects a misinterpretation and selective application of scripture that ignores broader themes of justice and equality. From a contemporary moral standpoint, the prohibition of interracial marriage is unequivocally an erroneous and morally reprehensible stance, rooted in prejudice and a denial of the fundamental human right to choose one's spouse freely, irrespective of racial identity. Moral reasoning dictates that love, commitment, and mutual respect should be the guiding principles in the formation of marital unions, and any attempt to restrict these unions based on race is inherently unjust and discriminatory.
Polyamorous family structures warrant comprehensive consideration and integration into a theological understanding of divine acceptance and recognition. This necessitates a dual approach, encompassing both legal and spiritual spheres. From a legal standpoint, extending rights and protections enjoyed by traditionally recognized family units to polyamorous configurations would affirm their validity and ensure the well-being of all members, particularly children. This could involve legal recognition of multiple parents, addressing issues of guardianship, inheritance, and healthcare decisions.
Within spiritual communities, a parallel process of theological reflection and inclusive practice is essential. This requires a re-evaluation of traditional interpretations of scripture and theological doctrines concerning family, love, and commitment. A theology that embraces the diversity of human relationships, grounded in principles of love, consent, respect, and mutual care, can find space for polyamorous families. These structures, far from being inherently detrimental, possess the capacity to cultivate strong and nurturing environments. The pooling of resources, both emotional and practical, among multiple adults can provide a robust support system for raising children. Furthermore, the intentional building of relationships based on open communication, honesty, and clearly defined boundaries can enhance the emotional fulfillment and personal growth of all involved. The potential for shared responsibility in domestic tasks and financial contributions can alleviate the burdens often placed on single or dyadic parent households. Embracing polyamorous families within both legal and spiritual frameworks would not only align with principles of justice and equality but also enrich our understanding of the varied and evolving expressions of love and family in contemporary society.
——————————
REFERENCES (For detailed references, download PDF)
Edman, Elizabeth M. (2016). Queer virtue : what LGBTQ people know about life and love and how it can revitalize Christianity. Beacon Press, p 68-69. Peter Hart-Brinson. (2018). The Gay Marriage Generation : How the LGBTQ Movement Transformed American Culture. NYU Press. OBERGEFELL ET AL. v. HODGES, DIRECTOR, OHIO DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ET AL. Strong, J. (1890). Strong’s Greek Lexicon. In Strong’s exhaustive concordance of the Bible. H376, H7901, H2145, H8441, G5446, G5540. Odern Family Law. (2024, October 7). Top 10 divorce statistics you need to know. Modern Family Law. Clagett Law. (n.d.). 10 leading causes of divorce in the United States. Clagett Law. Schippers, M. (2024). Polyamory. In The Sage Encyclopedia of LGBTQ+ STUDIES (2 ed., Vol. 0, pp. -). SAGE Publications, Inc. Obergfell v Hodges pg 4. Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967).
