Answers
The Answers - A Summary
Answers to the Key Questions about Same-Sex Partnerships
Part 1 - The Success or Failure of Same-Sex Partnerships Compared to Heterosexual Marriages
Contrary to the concerns of traditionalists, the statistics show monogamous same-sex partnerships are just as stable, enduring and successful as heterosexual marriages. Same-sex civil partnerships have only been legally recognised in this country since 2005 and same-sex marriages since 2014 but by 2021 234,000 people had entered these formal same-sex unions. Yet, even though most marriages that fail do so in the first seven years, the divorce rate of same-sex partnerships are overall very similar to heterosexual marriages; 7.8 per 1,000 compared to 6.7. In fact, male same-sex marriages on average have slightly lower divorce rates than heterosexual ones- 5.6 - likely due to the absence of gender role conflicts. Whilst female same-sex divorce rates are currently higher, research indicates this probably mainly stems from the general tendency of women—whether heterosexual or lesbian—to have higher relationship expectations and be less tolerant of infidelity. Studies measuring relationship quality have found that same-sex couples experience similar levels of satisfaction to heterosexual ones. This includes a huge 2018 Australian/British study of 35,000 participants. Interestingly, although lesbian partnerships may be slightly less stable, lesbian couples overall reported the highest levels of relationship happiness. These findings alongside the low divorce rates provide strong evidence that same-sex unions fulfil the essential biblical purposes and standards of marriage—love, companionship, mutual support, and faithful commitment—just as well as heterosexual marriages.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​
Part 2 -The Physical Health of Same-Sex Partnerships – is Gay Sex “Unhealthy”?​​
Many traditionalists would argue that, even if some same-sex partnerships do seem to be good and stable, in the longer term many are storing up physical harm for each other by practicing “unnatural” forms of sex, which are much more harmful than “natural” vaginal heterosexual intercourse. But the reality is the only common same-sex sexual act which carries greater risks than vaginal intercourse is all-male anal intercourse. Vaginal intercourse comes with its own health risks even within monogamous relationships, including unwanted pregnancy, thrush and occasional physical injuries. And the statistics are very clear that lesbian sexual activities are far safer than either heterosexual or all-male activities. Once you remove the “willy” from the equation you avoid or reduce most sexual health risks! Anal intercourse does carry increased risks compared to vaginal intercourse –mainly due to the rectum’s thinner lining. However, the risks of anal intercourse are hugely reduced when carried out carefully within a loving monogamous relationship. Furthermore, to the surprise of many traditionalists, surveys show anal intercourse is on average the least common of gay men’s regular sexual activities. In fact, the increasing popularity of anal intercourse amongst younger heterosexual couples means that most anal intercourse going on in the world today happens between heterosexual couples not gay men! And yet, if anything, for anatomical reasons anal intercourse is more risky for women to receive than men. It is true that gay men on average are slightly more promiscuous than heterosexual men, and this, along with the risks of unprotected anal intercourse, largely explains why so many gay men fell victim to AIDs in the 1980s and 90s. But isn’t this a reason to encourage gay men to enjoy sex within the safety and security of same-sex marriage, since we now know gay men usually do marriage very well together?
Part 3 -The Well-Being of Children Raised by Same-Sex Parents
One major concern among traditionalists is whether same-sex couples can provide stable, nurturing environments for children. However, decades of research—including a 2023 British Medical Journal study—confirm that on average children of same-sex parents have just as good outcomes in their mental and physical health as children raised by heterosexual couples. Academically, children raised in same-sex households on average perform just as well, if not slightly better, than their peers raised by heterosexual couples. The research therefore dispels any notion that heterosexual couples provide better parenting environments than same-sex couples.
Additionally, studies overwhelmingly conclude that children raised by same-sex couples do not exhibit a greater likelihood of identifying as LGBTQ+ themselves. A recent thorough review of 72 studies found no substantial link between parents' sexual orientation and that of their children.
Part 4 -What Good or Harm does Traditionalist Teaching do for LGBTQ+ Individuals?
All traditionalist approaches to “help” LGBTQ+ individuals deal with their “homosexuality" have consistently failed and done great harm. Medical interventions, such as behavioural aversion therapy with electric shocks, were not only ineffective but resulted in lasting psychological damage. Similarly, faith-based conversion practices, such as "praying away the gay," have proven futile. Exodus International, the once leading evangelical organization working for sexual orientation change, collapsed in 2013 after admitting that of the thousands it had tried to change in “99.9%” of cases it had failed.
The evidence from numerous studies, including a recent major government-sponsored study on conversion therapy, now conclusively establishes that neither medical nor spiritual interventions can “cure” homosexuality.
An alternative approach of encouraging LGBTQ+ individuals into opposite-sex marriages has been equally unsuccessful. This has nearly always led to emotional distress and marital breakdown, harming both partners and any children. A high profile example of this is the once leading evangelical preacher, Roy Clements. Many prominent evangelicals who attempted this approach eventually accepted their sexuality and found happiness in same-sex partnerships.
​
The current main traditionalist approach of mandating life-long celibacy for all gay believers goes directly against biblical teaching. Jesus and Paul both affirmed marriage as the norm for those who do not have the gift of celibacy and preached directly against forbidding marriage as dangerous heresy.
​
The harmful effects of enforced celibacy have been seen in church leaders, whose repressed homosexuality has led to great unhappiness for them and others, and sometimes even the abuse of vulnerable young people.
​Part 5 - What Good or Harm does Revisionist Teaching do for LGBTQ+ Individuals?
Revisionists encourage those LGBTQ+ individuals not content with celibacy to enter faithful same-sex marriages, directly applying New Testament principles of sex and marriage to LGBQT+ folk. The above evidence shows that committed same-sex relationships mirror the stability and fulfilment found in heterosexual marriages. Many former advocates of conversion therapy, like Jeremy Marks, testify that of those Christians not gifted with celibacy only those who accepted their sexuality and pursued committed same-sex relationships found true happiness.
​
Furthermore, promoting same-sex marriage can significantly reduce unhealthy, sinful promiscuity amongst LGBTQ+ individuals, especially gay men. When societal and religious pressures condemn same-sex relationships, many LGBTQ+ individuals have felt alienated from God and the church and, rebelling against them, they have engaged in risky sexual behaviours. By contrast, promoting monogamous same-sex marriages helps LGBTQ+ individuals to manage their sexual desires through marriage, avoiding risky promiscuous lifestyles.
Part 6 -Does Traditionalist Teaching Help or Harm the Gospel’s Reach?
One significant consequence of rejecting same-sex relationships is the negative impact on the church reaching new people for Christ.
​
One harm traditionalist teaching has done is waste so many gifts of Christians who happen to be born LGBTQ+. Just two examples are Roy Clements and Vicky Beeching. The church’s perceived discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals often alienates both LGBTQ+ people and their allies. Many see traditionalist positions on sexuality as akin to racism and sexism, making churches appear outdated and unwelcoming, even “evil” – the very opposite of our saviour’s love for all that he taught us to shine. The now almost universal acceptance of LGB individuals within society (if not TQ+) means that churches that persist in condemning same-sex relationships risk losing credibility and influence, so that they are hampered in meeting the unchurched majority with the gospel. Although many traditionalist churches have seen their numbers grow, much of this is “churn” of people who are already Christians rather than new people being saved.
Part 7 -Does Revisionist Teaching Help or Harm the Gospel’s Reach?
Missions like Andrew Marin’s have seen remarkable success in sharing the gospel by avoiding condemnation of LGBTQ+ relationships. His ministry demonstrates that LGBTQ+ individuals can and do come to saving faith in Jesus whilst remaining in committed same-sex relationships. Personal testimonies confirm the transformative power of God’s love for LGBTQ+ believers in committed same-sex partnerships.
​
Churches that embrace LGBTQ+ individuals often see genuinely new spiritual growth. Thriving affirming churches, including evangelical and charismatic congregations, are now successfully reaching people who would otherwise never consider Christianity.
Inclusive churches offer safe spaces where LGBTQ+ individuals and their allies can explore faith without fear of discrimination. This welcoming, affirming approach increases receptivity to the gospel and fosters deeper spiritual growth. Rather than deterring people from Christianity, revisionist teaching allows more individuals to hear and accept the life-transforming power of the gospel.
Our salvation should also be about experiencing a better, “more abundant life” (John 10:10) here and now. And for most LGBTQ+ individuals, as with most heterosexuals, this “more abundant life” will include sharing it with the sexual life-partner they happen to fall in love with. Only the revisionist teaching allows this.
