Fact Check
Print

Meet Robert Gagnon, The Anti-Gay Professor Speaking At NOM’s ITAF Conference

June 21, 2012 12:09 pm ET

At the end of July, the National Organization for Marriage’s (NOM) Ruth Institute will host its annual “It Takes A Family To Raise A Village” (ITAF) conference, which is geared towards introducing students to prominent anti-gay activists in order to prepare them to defend “natural marriage.” One of the speakers attending the event is Robert Gagnon, an Associate Professor of the New Testament with a history of linking homosexuality to pedophilia, promoting “ex-gay” therapy, and condemning homosexuality as unhealthy and dysfunctional.

General Anti-Gay Commentary

Homosexuality Is Harmful, Unhealthy

Homosexuality Is Linked To Pedophilia

Homosexuality Is Changeable, Treatable

LGBT Equality Threatens Religious Freedom

Gagnon Will Speak At ITAF Conference

Gagnon Will Give Two Speeches To Students During The Conference. According to a brochure for the 2012 conference, Gagnon will give speeches on the topics of “Jesus and Marriage” and “Paul and Homosexuality” during the conference:

[Ruth Institute ITAF Brochure, accessed 6/20/12]

Gagnon Has Presented At Every Previous ITAF Conference. Gagnon has spoken at every ITAF conference since its inception in 2009. [Ruth Institute ITAF Wrap-Up, 200920102011]

Gagnon Has Written Extensively About The Biblical View Of Homosexuality. According to the Ruth Institute’s biography for Gagnon:

Robert A. J. Gagnon is Associate Professor of New Testament at Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. He has a B.A. degree from Dartmouth College, an M.T.S. from Harvard Divinity School, and a Ph.D. from Princeton Theological Seminary. He is the author of The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 2001; 520 pgs.); co-author (with Dan O. Via) of Homosexuality and the Bible: Two Views (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2003; 125 pgs.); and author of a number of articles in scholarly journals and of major entries in encyclopedias having to do with various subjects relating to the Bible and early Christianity. As a service to the church Dr. Gagnon provides on his website at www.robgagnon.net many articles on the subject of Scripture and homosexuality. [Ruth Institute, accessed 6/20/12]

Gagnon’s Anti-Gay Activism

General Anti-Gay Commentary

Gagnon: Homosexual Relationships Are “Repulsively Contrary To Nature,” Worse Than Polyamory, Adultery, And Incest. In a 2009 email exchange about possibly extending domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples, Gagnon wrote:

[T]he supposition of extending some benefits to homosexual relationships underestimates the degree to which such relationships are offensive to God and are repulsively contrary to nature. Homosexual relationships are far worse than polyamory, worse even than adultery (isn’t it unfair not to allow health benefits and inheritance laws to extend to one’s mistress?), and comparable to, or more likely worse than, the worst forms of adult-incest (e.g., a man and his mother). The state should not in any way want to be accommodating to homosexual unions. It should do everything it can in terms of persuasion (short of violence and incarceration, of course) to discourage such unions. [Email exchange,11/6/09, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Same-Sex Relationships Are “A Long-Lasting Enterprise Of Sin And Mutual Dishonor.” In an email exchange with a gay man who was in a long-term relationship with his late partner, Gagnong wrote:

You are a man and yet you are sexually aroused by what you are in your essence: a man for maleness. You probably had a developed sense of gender nonconformity growing up, a sense of difference in relation to other males, which made you feel a longing for gender identity completion through union with another male. But attempting union with what you already are as a gendered being simply regularizes the misperception on your part that you are not fully male. That's a dishonoring of the stamp on masculinity placed on you by God. You may be in need of structural affirmation as a male but you are not in need of structural supplementation. You are not sexually completed by another male.

I'm saying this out of love for you. You do yourself a disservice by relating to other males as though you were their sexual complement. The fact that you had a long-lasting relationship is like congratulating an incestuous union between consenting adults for lasting 30 years. It's not a triumph but a long-lasting enterprise of sin and mutual dishonor. This is not to say that same-sex friendships are not a good thing. They are something wonderful. But when you introduce sex into the equation then you dishonor yourself by acting as if you are a half male. [Email exchange, 11/4/11, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Child Sexual Abuse Can Cause Homosexuality. In a 2006 article, Gagnon wrote:

I cite above two studies by the noted research on child sexual abuse Kurt Freund that purport to show that homosexual “teleiophiles” (homosexual males attracted to other adult males) differ from homosexual pedophiles in that the former reported “significantly poorer father-son relations.” Some youth might have a higher risk factor for homosexual development if they perceive themselves as a different and distant from same-sex peers (i.e., a peer-factor and not, or not just, a parental-factor). Even Myers and Scanzoni appear not to rule this possibility out entirely when they refer, without negative comment, to Daryl Bem’s “Exotic Becomes Erotic” theory. A number of studies in the last 15 years also suggest that childhood same-sex experience may be a risk factor for some homosexual development. For example, Laumann et al. Found that among the category of respondents who as children had been sexually touched by an adult, 7.4% of the men and 3.1% of the women identified as homosexual or bisexual. Yet self-identified homosexuals/bisexuals accounted for only 2.8% of the man and 1.4% of the women in the survey. [RobGagnon.net, 2/16/06, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Homosexuality Is “By Definition, Sexually Narcissistic Or At Least Sexually Self-Deceptive.” In a 2005 article, Gagnon wrote:

From a theological perspective, the core problem with any attempted homosexual bond is not merely that it is structurally incongruous. It is also, by definition, sexually narcissistic or at least sexually self-deceptive. As one ancient text put it, in a critique of male homosexual practice: “One nature [rather than two] came together in one bed. But seeing themselves in one another, they were ashamed neither of what they were doing, nor of what they were having done to them.” Or, as St. Paul put it: “males... were inflamed with their yearning for one another, males with males...” If one is conscious of being strongly aroused by the distinctive features of one’s own sex, it is a case of sexual narcissism. If one is not conscious of this sameness but thinks instead of a same-sex partner as completing what is lacking in one’s own sex (probably the more common scenario), then it is a case of sexual self-deception. A self-perception of gender deficit, expressed in a desire to merge with someone of the same sex, is consistent with scientific research regarding (1) high rates of gender nonconformity among homosexual males and (2) preferences on the part of most adult homosexual males for very “masculine” men. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added, citations removed for clarity]

Gagnon: Proponents Of Homosexuality Are “Consigning The Individual To Hell.” During a 2008 interview for Pure Passion, Gagnon said:

GAGNON: Love is about recovering people for the kingdom of God, not consigning them to hell. The irony is here it’s actually those who are tolerating the serial unrepentant sexual immorality that are consigning the individual to hell. And no matter what they feel affectively in themselves, functionally it turns out to be hate. If a person has two young children and those children want to touch a hot stove, and the parent says “there there, knock yourself out, go ahead and explore,” those parents are not considered loving. In fact, state social services takes the children out of the home and the parents go to prison. So clearly tolerance is not always loving. The issue that has to be faced here with regard to homosexual practice is first a truth question. Are people genuinely at risk in their relationship to God through serial unrepentant behavior? [Pure Passion, via Vimeo, 11/1/08, starting at 11:30] 

Gagnon: Society “Should Work To End The Cycle Of Homosexual Behavior.” In a 2005 article title “Immoralism, Homosexual Unhealth, and Scripture,” Gagnon wrote:

Any sin can be forgiven but all sin must be repented of. That is the point of contact between divorce/remarriage and homosexual practice. The issue is whether the behavior is repetitive and unrepentant. Divorced persons should commit anew to stop the cycle of divorce and remarriage. Homosexually active persons, like persons engaged in incest or polyamorous behavior, should commit anew to stop the structurally discordant behavior, here specifically sex with persons of the same sex. Just as society and certainly church work to end the cycle of divorce and remarriage, so too they should work to end the cycle of homosexual behavior. It is inadequate to say: But we do want to end the cycle of promiscuous homosexual activity. For neither do we say merely: We should end the cycle of promiscuous incestuous or polyamorous activity. The structural incongruity of same-sex intercourse remains even when the promiscuity stops. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Homosexuality Is Harmful, Unhealthy

Gagnon: Homosexuality Should Still Be Classified As A Mental Disorder. From Gagnon’s 2005 article “Immoralism, Homosexual Unhealth, and Scripture”:

“Pedophilia, unlike homosexuality, is a pathological mental disorder.” One can get at the inaccuracy of this statement from two different angles. One is to make the case, as I have done above, that there is a significant pathological side to homosexuality as regards mental health issues and relational problems (short-term relationships, nonmonogamy) that cannot be attributed simply to societal opposition to homosexual practice. That the two APAs (Psychiatric and Psychological) no longer classify homosexuality as such in their official literature is not surprising in view of the grip that homosexual advocacy groups have on each organization. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Gagnon: “Homosexual Activity” Causes “Disproportionately High Levels Of Negative Measurable Harm.” In a September 29 email exchange with a supporter, Gagnon wrote:

A biological basis for homosexuality cannot be a moral basis for validating homosexual practice inasmuch as all human behavior (good and bad) is attributable at some level to differences in brain structure and process. What we do see in homosexual activity is disproportionately high levels of negative measurable harm that correspond to gender types: numbers of sex partners over life and sexually transmitted infections (esp. for homosexual males) and shorter term unions on average and mental health complications (esp. for homosexual females). The differences between homosexual males and homosexual females in the rates of these harms is obviously due to basic male-female differences, ratcheted up in homosexual unions because they lack a true sexual complement (someone of the other sex). In homosexual unions the extremes of a given sex are not moderated and the gaps in the sexual self are not filled because there is no "other sex" in the union to be that moderating, complementary influence. [Email exchange, 9/29/11, emphasis added]

Gagnon: There Is “An Inherent Deficiency In Homosexual Unions” Which Causes “Scientifically Measurable Negative Harm.” In a 2006 article on differing biblical views of homosexuality, Gagnon wrote:

There is thus an inherent deficiency in homosexual unions: the absence of a sexual counterpart to moderate the extremes of, and fill the gaps in, the distinctive features of one’s own sex. This deficiency is largely responsible for the disproportionately high rate of scientifically measurable, negative harm that attends homosexual activity, at different rates for homosexual males and homosexual females respectively. This includes higher rates of sexually transmitted disease (especially among homosexual males), higher rates of mental health problems (especially among homosexual females), higher numbers of sex partners lifetime (especially among homosexual males), shorter-term relationships (especially among homosexual females), and a higher correlation with adult-adolescent or adult-child sexual activity (among male homosexuals). Although proponents of homosexual unions attribute these higher rates exclusively, or nearly so, to societal homophobia, a significant causation factor is likely the distinctive excesses of each sex that are not moderated in same-sex unions. [RobGagnon.net, 2/16/06, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Approval Of Homosexuality Leads To More Homosexuality, Health Problems. In a 2006 article, Gagnon wrote:

As noted above, there is good evidence that societal approval of homosexual practice may increase the incidence of homosexuality and bisexuality, not just homosexual practice. Since the homosexual life is characterized by a comparatively high rate of problems in terms of sexually transmitted disease, mental health issues, nonmonogamous behavior, and short-term unions – even in homosex-affirming areas of the world – an increase in homosexuality and bisexuality will mean more persons affected by such problems. [RobGagnon.net, 2/16/06, emphasis added]

Homosexuality Is Linked To Pedophilia

Gagnon: “The Affirmation Of A Same-Sex Lifestyle Will Increase The Incidence Of Pedophilic Activity.” In his 2002 book, “The Bible and Homosexual Practice,” Gagnon wrote:

A second negative effect of societal endorsement of homosexuality has to do with the problem of pedophilia and its role in “recruiting” homosexuals into the fold.  There can be little doubt that affirmation of a same-sex lifestyle will increase the incidence of pedophilic activity, regardless of society's attempt to distinguish the two.  The greater the latitude given to sexual expression, the more likelihood there will be of people crossing the line into illicit conduct.  Indeed, a substantial body of literature emanating from the homosexual community entertains the morality of adult-adolescent sex.  The gay community as a whole has not vigorously and swiftly rejected this development.  Indeed, homosexual groups in other countries have been at the forefront of efforts to lower the age for sexual consent.

Although the majority of homosexuals are not pedophiles and do not publicly promote pedophilia, the incidence of same-sex pedophilic behavior is disproportionately high. [“The Bible and Homosexual Practice,” via RobGagnon.net, September 2002, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Homosexuals Are “Significantly” More Likely To Engage In Pedophilia Than Heterosexuals. According to a 2005 Gagnon article:

As we have argued above, the proportion of persons with a homosexual erotic development who become pedophiles or engage in pedophilic activity is far higher than the proportion of persons with a heterosexual development. Otherwise stated: Homosexual development results in homosexual pedophilia substantially more often as a percentage of the total number than heterosexual development results in heterosexual pedophilia. Otherwise stated: The rate of homosexual attraction among pedophiles is significantly higher than the rate of heterosexual attraction. Still otherwise stated: The percentage of homosexual men who are “teleiophilic” (oriented exclusively or primarily to adults), while significantly greater than the percentage of homosexual men who are pedophilic, is nonetheless substantially less than the percentage of heterosexual men who are teleiophilic and not pedophilic. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Attempts To Differentiate Between Homosexuals And Pedophiles “Is Just ‘Smoke And Mirrors.’” According to a 2005 article written by Gagnon:

This idea that “homosexuals” and “pedophiles” are mutually exclusive groups is just ‘smoke and mirrors’ by psychiatric and psychological associations concerned to protect the image of homosexual persons. A person attracted only or primarily to children of the same sex is by definition homosexual (a term that means ‘same-sexual,’ with the prefix homo- derived from the Greek homoios, “like, same”). An age-restrictive or pedophilic homosexual is a homosexual nonetheless. Both age and sex constitute the structural criteria for such attraction. The very terminology “homosexual pedophile” makes the point, even though an attempt may be wrongly made to distinguish such a person from a pedophilic homosexual. By the same token, a man attracted exclusively, or nearly so, to girls rather than women is an age-defined (i.e., pedophilic) heterosexual or heterosexual pedophile. And a man attracted to both girls and boys may be labeled either a bisexual pedophile or a pedophilic bisexual. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Leads To “Adult-Child Relationships And Bestiality.” In a 2006 article, Gagnon wrote:

[T]his cheapening effect on the institution of marriage would be reinforced by the effective elimination of formal or structural prerequisites for marriage that transcend both mutual commitment and an inability to prove inherent, measurable harm. This would leave society with little justification for holding the line against other forms of committed sexual relationship for which at most only a disproportionately high level of harm, but not universal harm, could be surmised: various kinds of polyamorous relationships, incest,adult-adolescent relationships, and perhaps even adult-child relationships and bestiality. Proponents of homosexual marriage may protest that they are not advocating such inions. Yet the logic of their position moves to the ultimate outcome. [RobGagnon.net, 2/16/06, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Pedophilia And Homosexuality Are Both Harmful “Impulse-Oriented Traits.” In a 2005 article in the Journal of Psychology and Christianity, Gagnon wrote:

“Sexual orientation” should be seen as just one part of a larger matrix of human orientations that must be evaluated in light of the cross. Simply because a Christian experiences intense sexual urges for more than one person is no license for identifying himself (or herself) as a “polyamorist” or “polysexual.” Likewise, a Christian who experiences pedophilic impulses need not, and indeed should not, view his sexual identity as that of a “pedosexual” or pedophile. This is so in spite of the fact that nobody would ever choose to have pedophilic impulses; such impulses are deeply ingrained and highly resistant to change. Yet identity is something altogether different. We may not have a choice in experiencing certain impulses but we do have a choice in whether we will define ourselves by compliance with such impulses. It may not be a person’s that he or she experiences sexual impulses and desires for things that God forbids. Yet such a person is responsible for what he or she does with such impulses. Moreover, impulse-oriented traits are not comparable to traits like race or ethnicity. A person’s ethnic ancestry is immutable, benign, and non-behavioral. Impulse-oriented traits, however, are not absolutely immutable (at least intensity fluctuates through the course of life). Nor are they inherently benign (many impulses exist for immoral behavior). Nor are they non-behavioral (impulses are desires to engage in specific behaviors). We must not make the elementary mistake of assuming that, as regards such traits, either “God made people that way” and so wants them to satisfy such impulses or God “goofed.” A biology-equals-morality rationale has no place in a worldview that talks of denying oneself, losing one’s life, taking up one’s cross, dying with Christ, new creation, and living for God. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Accepting Same-Sex Relationships Leads To The Acceptance Of “Adult-Child” And “Adult-Adolescent Sex.” In a 2004 article about same-sex marriage, Gagnon wrote:

The whole “gay marriage” debate is predicated on the assumption that affective bonds trump the structural argument from Scripture and nature for an other-sex prerequisite. What logical basis will remain for denying marriage to committed sexual unions comprised of three or more persons? In fact, the limitation of two persons in a sexual union at any one time is itself predicated on the idea that two sexes are necessary and sufficient for establishing a sexual whole. Once church and society reject a two-sexes prerequisite, there will be no logical ground for maintaining the sacredness of the number two in sexual relations. It is not surprising that litigants in polygamy cases in Utah and Arizona are now applying the moral reasoning of the Supreme Court decision in the 2003 Lawrence v. Texas sodomy case. Similarly, a committed sexual relationship between a man and his mother, or between two adult siblings, has as much right to marriage as homosexual unions. Incest prohibitions are predicated on the idea that it is inappropriate to validate a sexual merger between two persons who share too much structural sameness (here, of a familial sort through close blood relations). But an approval of same-sex intercourse cancels out arguments based on excessive structural similarity. Not even adult-child sex can be ruled out of bounds completely, and much less adult-adolescent sex, since some adults who have had sex as children are asymptomatic in terms of scientifically measurable negative effect. [RobGagnon.net, July 2004, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Homosexuality And Pedophilia Are Similar Sexual Orientations. In a 2005 article about homosexuality, Gagnon wrote:

Neither homosexuality nor pedosexuality causes intrinsic measurable harm, though both are associated with increased risk of measurable harm. A secondary point is to show similarities in the advocacy for each. Both homosexuality and pedosexuality are sexual orientations. Therapeutic success in completely eliminating all desires in question is far from the norm. Both associated behaviors can be documented in the animal kingdom and have existed in societies historically and cross-culturally, with some degree of approval. Modern “phobias” about the behavior may contribute to the poor mental health of those who engage in the behavior. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Homosexuality Is Changeable, Treatable

Gagnon: Affirming A Gay Person’s “Maleness” And “Femaleness” Can Help “Reduce Or Make Manageable” Homosexual Impulses. In a 2005 article, Gagnon wrote:

One of the goals of counseling a person with homoerotic desires is to affirm the structural integrity of that person’s sex, an integrity that may need affirmation by members of the same sex but not supplementation by such. God declared the creation of “male and female” and their sexual compatibility to be “good.”

[...]

What is needed, then, is affirmation of one’s God-given maleness, if male, or of one’s God-given femaleness, if female, in order to reduce the felt need for structural supplementation with a member of the same sex. The intimate bond of Christian “fellowship” or “partnership” of which the New Testament often speaks (e.g., Act 2:42-47) but which the church often falls short of providing, ought to be the primary conduit for such affirmation – particularly, intimate, nonsexual relationships with persons of the same sex.

I do not say that such affirmation will have a magical effect in eliminating same-sex attraction. The brain does not have unlimited plasticity. But such affirmation, reinforced long-term, may help in dealing with genuine needs and reduce or make manageable the intensity of such impulses. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Christian Psychologists Should Encourage Gay People To Resist Their Same-Sex Attractions Even If It Causes Them “Distress.” While discussing “ex-gay” counseling in a 2005 article, Gagnon wrote:

Consistent with his Jewish Scriptures, Jesus considered sexual ethics to be a life-and-death matter. The incentive behind Jesus’ outreach was a loving sense of urgency about the possible exclusion of such sinners -- persons who egregiously transgressed the will of God -- from God’s coming kingdom. It was better to enter heaven maimed, through cutting off offending limbs (metaphorically speaking) than to be thrown into hell full-bodied.

[...]

The aim of a truly Christian psychology is not, in the first instance, elimination of all distress but rather conformity of the person’s life to the will of God. Sometimes the doing of God’s will is stressful -- the cross is a key example of this. However, the outcome of such a life is well worth the momentary sensation of deprivation. [RobGagnon.net, 2005, emphasis added, citations removed for clarity]

Gagnon: Homosexuality Isn’t Heritable, Can Be Changed, And “Is Not Inherently Benign.” In a 2009 article about biblical teachings on homosexuality, Gagnon wrote:

[W]hereas race or ethnicity is a 100% heritable, absolutely immutable, and primarily non-behavioral condition, and so inherently benign, homosexual desire is an impulse and, like many impulses, it is not 100% heritable (there may be congenital influences but these are not absolutely deterministic), is open to some change (even if only, in some cases, a limited reduction in the intensity of impulses), is primarily behavioral (here for unnatural, i.e. structurally incompatible, sexual activity), and therefore is not inherently benign. [RobGagnon.net,3/14/09]

Gagnon: “Societal Approval Of Homosexual Practice May Increase The Incidence Of Homosexuality And Bisexuality.” In a 2004 article, Gagnon wrote:

[T]here is good evidence that societal approval of homosexual practice may increase the incidence of homosexuality and bisexuality, not just homosexual practice. We know that: (1) Adolescents experience a much higher rate of sexual orientation uncertainty than adults. (2) Most self-professed gays and lesbians and some heterosexuals experience one or more shifts on the 0-6 Kinsey spectrum in the course of life. (3) Geographical (rural vs. urban) and educational variables have a profound effect on the incidence of homosexual self-identification. (4) Those who self-identify as gay or lesbian are several times more likely to have experienced sex at an early age than those who self-identify as heterosexual. (5) A 2001 study by University of California professors Judith Stacey and Timothy Biblarz reported that children of homosexual couples were “more likely to be open to homoerotic relationships”. (6) There are instances of significant cross-cultural differences, ancient and modern, regarding the incidence and shape of homosexual practice. (7) The best identical twin studies indicate that the large majority of identical twin pairs where at least one twin identifies as non-heterosexual do not show a concordance match in the co-twin (i.e., the co-twin identifies as heterosexual). Given these considerations, it would not be surprising if the significant increase in homosexual activity reported for both the United States and Britain over the past decade or two were attributable, in part, to an increase in homosexuality and bisexuality. Since the homosexual life is characterized by a comparatively high rate of problems in terms of sexually transmitted disease, mental health issues, nonmonogamous behavior, and short-term unions—even in homosex-affirming areas of the world—an increase in homosexuality and bisexuality will mean more persons affected by such problems. [RobGagnon.net, July 2004, emphasis added, citations removed for clarity]

LGBT Equality Threatens Religious Freedom

Gagnon: Hate Crime Laws Encourage Hatred Against Anti-LGBT Individuals, Promote The “Homosexualist Agenda.” In a 2009 article about the effort to include “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” as protected categories under federal hate crime legislation, Gagnon wrote:

[W]hy pass “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” so-called “hate crime” legislation? The reason has more to do with foisting an expansive homosexualist agenda on the nation than with concerns about crime. The bill serves the following vital aims of that agenda:  

  • It gets the federal government to enshrine in federal law “sexual orientation” (i.e. homosexuality and bisexuality) and “gender identity”(i.e. transsexualism and cross-dressing) as identity markers worthy of special protection and promotion alongside racial and gender diversity.
  • This in turn gives federal backing to hatred of all persons who express opposition to homosexual practice and transgenderism as the moral equivalent of racists and misogynists (sexists), no matter how loving that expression of opposition may be.
  • It also lays the foundation for a litany of future “sexual orientation” and “gender identity” bills that will markedly abridge the civil liberties of all who express moral disapproval of homosexual practice and transgenderism.

[...]

This bill thus goes beyond protection of homosexual, bisexual, and transgendered persons (who are already protected) to promotion of hatred—hatred toward those opposed to homosexual and transgendered behavior. If you have any doubt about that, consider whether adding pedophilia (‘pedosexuality’) to the list would imply promotion of pedophilic behavior by the state and antagonism by the state toward perceived opponents of pedophiles. Surely it would. [RobGagnon.net, 5/28/09]

Gagnon: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Will Result In School Indoctrination And Potential Incarceration For Anti-Gay People. From a 2004 article:

“[G]ay marriage,” as the ultimate legal sanctioning of homosexual behavior, will bring with it a wave of intolerance toward, and attack on the civil liberties of, those who publicly express disapproval of homosexual practice (see Alan Sears and Craig Osten, The Homosexual Agenda). The latter will be regarded, legally and morally, as the equivalent of virulent racists. In the civil sphere, they will see their, and their children’s, educational opportunities, gainful employment, and even freedom from incarceration put at increasing risk. Christian colleges and seminaries will risk losing their tax-exempt status, access to federal grants and student loans, and ultimately accreditation itself. Public schools will intensify their indoctrination of children into the acceptability of homosexual unions and single out for ridicule any who question this agenda—from kindergarten on. Parents’ rights in instilling moral values in their children will be abridged. Indeed, the state could remove self-professed gay and lesbian children from parents who express moral disapproval of homosexual practice on the pretense of “child abuse.” Mainline denominations will comply with societal trends by refusing to ordain “heterosexists” and disciplining heterosexist clergy and ostracizing heterosexist members. Since approval of homosexual practice can only occur at the cost of marginalizing Scripture, the trend will be toward a hard-left radicalization of mainline denominations. [RobGagnon.net, July 2004, emphasis added]

Gagnon: Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage Would Put Anti-Gay Individuals In Danger Of “Being Fired Or Imprisoned.” In an article titled “The Threat Of The Homosexual Agenda to Your Freedoms,” Gagnon wrote:

Most people have not been closely following the implications of the promotion of the homosexual agenda in other Western countries, especially Canada and Sweden, or even in selected areas of the United States. Here are some results that would follow from granting homosexual marriage or its legal equivalent and making "sexual orientation" a specially protected civil rights category for "hate speech" and "non-discrimination" laws.  

(1) Go to jail for "hate speech." [...]

(2) Lose your job for not supporting "coming out" celebrations at work or for "discriminatory" speech outside of the workplace. [...]

(3) Be fined and pay heavy legal fees for daring to criticize, or not supporting with your business, homosexual practice. [...]

(4) Have your children taken away from you if you teach them "homophobic" ideas. [...]

(5) Have the school systems teach your children that you are a hateful bigot. [...]

The one political concern where the greatest sea change in the federal government's policies is likely to come is not in social programs for the disadvantaged, the environment, taxes, or even the Iraq War. No, the greatest change is likely to come on the issue of homosexual advocacy and the oppressive hand of the federal government against those who resist the false conclusion that homosexual practice is a normal, natural, and acceptable form of behavior that society should promote. It is on this issue that there is a serious prospect of radical abridgement of your religious and civil freedoms, to the point of being fired or imprisoned. What could be more alarming? [RobGagnon.net, 2004, emphasis added]