The 6 Most Ridiculous Arguments Against Gay Marriage

We count down the most irrational statements made by same-sex marriage opponents.

By Sam H. Escobar — Written on Jan 31, 2013

For those of you who haven't heard, gay marriage should not be legal because homosexuals have to use "substantial advance planning" when it comes to having children, i.e. they can't get "knocked up" the way heterosexual couples can. Logical, right? Of course not.

But Paul D. Clement, gay marriage opponent and a former solicitor general under George Bush, seems to think this is an adequate argument against it. Of course, he fails to acknowledge the 1.5 million infertile pairs of people who are also forced into "substantial advance planning," but then again, the kind of person who argues this point isn't exactly going to round all the bases intellect-wise, if you catch my drift.

Let's take a look at some of the other totally rational and informative arguments anti-gay marriage folks have made!

1. "If marriage is radically redefined as a way of just affirming loving feelings of attraction, then equality will require all people who love dogs to marry dogs. And people who love ice cream to marry ice cream."
Senior professor of Christian ethics at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary Daniel Heimbach revealed his deep-rooted fear of Rockyroadasexuals coming to power if two consenting human beings are allowed to be married, which makes so much sense because ice cream is basically a person in a cone's body.

2. "If you're involved in the gay and lesbian lifestyle, it's bondage. It is personal bondage, personal despair and personal enslavement."
Michele Bachman at the EdWatch National Education Conference in 2004, explaining why — again — two consenting people deciding to be with one another is just about the same as enslaving oneself to being miserable forever. After all, being stuck with someone you care about and love is infinitely worse than pretending you're someone you aren't for your whole life, which sounds so much more fun!

3. "Is anyone saying same-sex couples can't love each other? I love my children. I love my friends, my brother. Heck, I even love my mother-in-law. Should we call these relationships marriage, too?"
Listen, Rich Santorum, while your little quip about mothers-in-law was likely endearing to those who still think King of Queens is funny, I'm pretty sure that unless you like to sleep with all of these people and have romantic attachment to them, your argument is null and void. And if you do have those sorts of feelings for all those people, then I believe my only response is, "Oh, dear."

4. "It not only is a complete undermining of the principles of family and marriage and the hope of future generations, but it completely begins to see our society break down to the extent that that foundational unit of the family that is the hope of survival of this country is diminished to the extent that it literally is a threat to the nation's survival in the long run."
Representative Trent Franks (R. - Ariz.) voiced his concern that the United States will essentially crumble if happy, loving families are able to legally join together. Poverty, the economy, sexism, racism, gun violence, unemployment, domestic abuse, environmental concerns and all the other actual serious problems facing our country aside, maybe he has a point! No, wait, even then he still sounds ridiculous.

5. "[G]ays and lesbians are one of the most influential, best-connected, best-funded, and best organized interest groups in modern politics and have attained more legislative victories, political power and popular favor in less time than virtually any other group in American history."
This quote is from a brief filed by BLAH (the House's Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group made up of mostly Republicans) just last week. Basically, their argument is that gays are so powerful because people support their rights that they don't need people to defend their rights. So giving them those rights that they seek would be bad, because they’re already too powerful. What the what?