Eerdmans

I went to the Eerdmans website to check the delivery date of Thiselton's new one volume systematic theology: November, so I'll have to wait.

However, interestingly I came across their blog, and saw the most recent entry on same sex 'marriage'.

I liked this comment (don't know how long it will stay there though):

The Christian support for 'same sex marriage' seemingly arises from the desire to be fair or loving or inclusive of difference or diversity, but it is not. It rather represents a failure of critical rationality and participates in the delusion that a same sex partnership could be sexual, noting that marriage provides sexually diverse companionship and for the bringing of children into the world.

In principle two people of the same sex do not couple with that inherent diversity nor are able to bring children into the world, obviously. So, in short, no possibility of a zygote, no possibility of a marriage.

People of the same sex do not and cannot have a sexual relationship; they might have a anti-sex relationship, as they are not characterised by the difference (ironically) that a sexual relationship requires. Mere collision of sexual apparatus does not make a relationship sexual, only sexually perverse.

It seems more than odd then, that Christians would seek to advance a non-sexual relationship as being anything like marriage when it is a socially inert arrangement that is unproductive of children in principle. It constitutes a biological dead end and is barren. Some advance the objection that not all marriages can or do produce children. However, this objection sidesteps the obvious point that it is only male and female together who are able to produce children, while in the particular they might choose not to or not be able to such a relationship is ethically and socio-biologically contiguous with one that does; whereas male and male or female and female cannot, period.

In fact, to put the lie to the idea of same sex marriage, if they do want to reproduce they must put aside the exclusivity of marriage and include a third party to produce the required zygote. But this results in a child cut off from one of its natural parents and exposed to the Cinderella effect. A hideous outcome that at its worst turns children into a commodity,  denies them the nurturing complexity that is designed (or evolved for those who prefer that idea) and marriage into a hollow black comedy.