SeanMcDowell.org
Truth Overruled is an important book. In fact, it is a very important book. Whether you support same-sex marriage or oppose it, this is a book any thoughtful person needs to digest. I have heard many supporters of same-sex marriage (including Christians) claim that there are no good reasons to support natural marriage. As Anderson points out, this claim is “as manifestly self-serving as it is absurd” (p. 5). Even if you disagree with Anderson, his book is well reasoned, balanced, and forceful.
Anderson is careful to indicate that he is not making a religious argument. Even though he is Catholic, he never once quotes the Bible as evidence for his views. Rather than making a theological argument, he makes his case for natural marriage from history, philosophy, political science, and social science. And he also recognizes that same-sex marriage is not the reason for the decay of marriage in our culture. In my book Same-Sex Marriage, which I co-wrote with John Stonestreet, we point out that same-sex marriage is not the root of the problem; it is the fruit of the problem. Anderson agrees:
“Long before there was a debate about same-sex anything, far too many heterosexuals bought into a liberal ideology about sexuality that makes a mess of marriage: cohabitation, no-fault divorce, extramarital sex, nonmarital childbearing, pornography, and the hook-up culture all contributed to the breakdown of the marriage culture. The push for legal redefinition of marriage didn’t cause any of these problems. It is, rather, their logical conclusion” (p. 16).
One of the most helpful sections in Truth Overruled involves three lessons from the pro-life movement, which apply to the pro-marriage movement. First, says Anderson, “We must call the court’s ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges what it is: judicial activism.” Like Roe v. Wade, Obergefell does not tell the truth about human nature or about our Constitution. Second, “We must protect our freedom to speak and live according to the truth.” The pro-life movement has assured that doctors don’t have to perform abortions, that taxpayer money won’t fund abortions, and that pro-lifers would not be discriminated against. The marriage movement must do the same. Third, “We must redouble our efforts to make the case in the public square” (p. 8-9).
Marriage has historically been understood as a relationship different in kind from others. It is not simply a relationship of more passion or commitment, but a permanent, exclusive, comprehensive union of one man and one woman that is oriented towards childbearing. The recent SCOTUS ruling, however, makes marriage different only in degree from other relationships. In other words, marriage has what all other relationships have, but just more of it. As Anderson observes, “…the Supreme Court’s ruling didn’t expand marriage; it redefined marriage” (p. 37).
This redefinition raises some important questions:
“If marriage is simply about consenting adult romance and caregiving, why should it be permanent? In fact…why should it be a sexually exclusive union? Lastly, if marriage is simply about consenting adult romance and caregiving, why can’t three, four, or more people form a marriage?” (p. 15).
Anderson discusses the social science evidence that kids flourish best with moms and dads, he shows how sexual orientation is not like race, and he illustrates the false tolerance that is often propagated in the name of “inclusion.” For instance, Apple didn’t like the message of the Manhattan Declaration, and removed it from the App Store. Anderson defends the right of Apple to do this! And yet he points out the irony of this statement by Tim Cook, Apple CEO: “Our message, to people around the country and around the world, is this: Apple is open. Open to everyone, regardless of where they come from, what they look like, how they worship or who they love”. As Anderson observes, Apple’s message should be: “Apple is closed. Closed to those with beliefs we disapprove of” (p. 115).
As far as criticism, I wish Anderson included more practical things that “normal” people could do to defend religious liberty and to make the case for marriage. In other words, what can each of us to help build a marriage culture? But in fairness, he does give some helpful steps (179-192). And his book is more of a “roadmap” for how the church should respond, than a practical guide for facing the particular situations people may face in their businesses and lives.
Much more could be said about Truth Overruled. Here are some of the most insightful and challenging quotes:
“People seem to think the debate is over. They’re wrong” (p. 10).
“The law cannot be neutral between the consent-based and conjugal view of marriage. It will enshrine one view or the other. It will either teach that marriage is about consenting adult love of whatever size or shape the adults choose, or it will teach that marriage is a comprehensive union of sexually complementary spouses who live by the norms of monogamy, exclusivity, and permanency, so that children can be raised by their mom and dad. There is no third option” (17).
“There is no such thing as ‘parenting.’ There is mothering, and there is fathering, and children do best with both” (26).
“Marriage protects children from poverty. It increases the likelihood that they will enjoy social mobility. It steers them away from crime and relieves the state of having to pick up the pieces of their families. If you care about social justice or limited government, if you care about the poor or about freedom, you should care about a strong marriage culture. Civil recognition and support of the marriage union of a man and a woman is the most effective and least intrusive way to pursue freedom and prosperity” (32).
“Someone might object that it hardly matters if a small percentage of marriages are open, group, or temporary. The same argument was made during the no-fault divorce debate. No-fault divorce was for the relatively small number of people suffering in unhappy marriage and would be irrelevant for everyone else. But the change in the law changes everyone’s expectations of marital permanence. The breakdown of the marriage culture that followed made it possible in our generation to consider removing sexual complementarity from the legal definition of marriage. And that redefinition may lead to further redefinition” (51).
“As a matter of natural law, the right to religious liberty is based on the moral truth that sincere religious activity, freely undertaken, is valuable in itself—it is a basic component of well-being—and should be allowed to flourish” (109).
“Indeed, religious liberty claims in connection with same-sex marriage have never been about turning away certain persons or groups, but about not endorsing certain actions or ceremonies” (111).
“What ultrasound has done for the pro-life movement, good social science can do for the marriage movement” (148).
“In this struggle to preserve marriage, as in the pro-life cause, we need to take a long view, not counting the immediate wins or losses, but rebuilding, over decades perhaps, the intellectual and moral infrastructure of a society that can once again appreciate the truth about marriage (207).
Again, this book is worth reading, studying, and discussing. Even if you disagree with Anderson, our society will only survive and thrive when we take the time to understand and seriously consider the views of those we disagree with.
Sean McDowell, Ph.D. is an assistant professor of Christian Apologetics at Biola University, a best-selling author of over 15 books, an internationally recognized speaker, and a part-time high school teacher. Follow him on Twitter: @sean_mcdowell. He blogs regularly at seanmcdowell.org.