National (Massachusetts, California) and international (Canada, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands) trends are moving toward giving full legal rights to homosexual marriages.

In the face of these legal changes, the traditional Christian opposition to "gay marriage" is increasingly seen as narrow-minded and intolerant. But to my mind, it remains an important perspective that should remain part of the current public debates on this issue.

The traditional Christian view on homosexual relations cannot properly be understood as an isolated issue. It can only be understood in the much wider context of Christian views on creation, sexuality, marriage and the purpose of human life.

Since God created the world, all created things reflect the order and purpose of their creator. Natural laws reflect the design and purposes of God. These natural laws work in humans just as much as in the rest of nature.

God created humans as sexual beings: "male and female he created them." Naturally, biologically, humans create new life only through sexual intercourse between a man and woman. So sexual union between a male and female can never be one of several arbitrary "alternatives" - its very nature shows it to be the only means by which new life is created.

Christians consider the sexual union between a committed husband and wife as a profoundly sacred act. Its primary biological purpose, of course, is to lead to new life. At the same time, it also fulfills a deeply spiritual purpose in drawing the man and woman closer together, not only physically, but also at deeper levels of emotional and even spiritual unity. "The two shall become one flesh." The biological and the spiritual purposes are inextricably intertwined.

So in this sense, homosexual relations can never be equated with male and female sexual relations. Biologically, naturally, and therefore in the purposes of the creator of nature, they are not the same. While admittedly they could fulfill the purpose of bringing the couple closer together, they always lack that most profound, mysterious purpose of cooperating with God in the creation of new life.

Again, one must consider this issue in a larger context. There are many forces in our society that deny the sacred nature of sexual relations, and its profound link with procreation. Sex is perversely used to sell products, and "casual sex" without profound commitment increasingly is accepted as normal. In my view, the claim that there is no essential difference between homosexual relations (which can never produce life) and male and female sexual relations (which can) is yet one more social pressure that helps to obscure the mysterious and sacred nature of heterosexual relations.

It should be clear, too, that the institution of marriage has always had an essential connection with the procreative purpose of sexual union. It arose in human societies as an institutional means of ensuring that children would be raised in a stable environment. Its primary purpose has never been to regulate friendship or commitment of one person to another.

But could not a homosexual couple also raise an adopted child? Of course. Would not some homosexual couples provide a more stable upbringing than certain heterosexual couples? I am sure this is true in some cases. But ethical standards, by definition, provide general guidelines. And the Christian view is that the most natural environment for raising children is also the healthiest - a committed and stable mother and father. Male and female roles naturally complement one another.

Of course many people in our society reject the idea that male and female parenting roles are natural, and they point to various studies that show how masculine and feminine traits are socially determined. But let me offer just one small example as evidence against that claim. Biologically, naturally, it is only the female who is able to breast-feed a baby. In this simple action of the mother, we see again that profound connection between the physical, emotional and spiritual bonding. A father with a bottle, for all the good that he does do, can naturally never achieve that same level of intimacy.

This is cache, read story here