People Who Are Against Gay Marriage Aren't Thinking Things Through.

[Revoltingest]

Replace "gay" with "black" or "female", and you'll find your answer.

I don't see it as inherently hateful, but it certainly appears to lead some people there.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

You need to read the Bible more thoroughly. The Bible talks about most of those, too- in the same section as the "quote" in question. It says not to have sex relations (marriage was never in question, just sex relations) with your mother, father, stepmother, stepfather, brother, sister, etc.

I brought this kind of thing on a different post: That those same books tell us to sacrifice various animals (and eat them), have women put out of the village during her monthly time, not to eat pork and shellfish, and so on and so forth.

Sometimes you have to just think about those things.

Although I am aware of what the bible says about those things it makes little difference to me. Any religious beliefs are fine with me, so long as they don't impinge on the rights of others.

Of course, there's the problem. Saying something should be illegal means advocating banning a practice for everyone. If Christians want to ban gay marriage in their denominations churches for whatever reason that's fine with me (although here in the UK, the Quakers at least have asked to be able to perform legal gay marriage ceremonies as opposed to simple blessings). Banning it from a legal perspective should have reasonable justification. Same with incest, same with everything.

 

[9Westy9]

What if its all the above?

Perhaps their faith motivates them to see homosexuality as an unnatural thing in society and they feel that its truly wrong to be gay. We are talking about an honest belief that being gay is wrong. Is that hate?

Sounds more like ignorance than anything.

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I don't see it as inherently hateful, but it certainly appears to lead some people there.

It most certainly is the breeding ground of hate, R.

Saying it's wrong to be gay, to be a woman, to be left-handed, to be a dwarf, to have three nipples, to have darker skin, to be bald, to be too old, to be chairbound, to be bedridden, etc.....if people think being that way is something wrong or in error with what "nature intended" (however one defines nature), it's prejudiced.

Hate and fear is an extension from ignorance, and prejudiced views are the bridge between to the two. It's just one step closer to advocating for that group's rights in being active members of society to be rescinded.

 

[Zoe Doidge]

Whether gay marriage is right or wrong, why would gay couples choose to be married by an institution which is against what they are doing anyway? Why not just use a civil ceremony?

There are religious institutions that do approve of gay marriage, but for the most part a civil marriage is exactly what they would do.

 

[tempter]

This is a paraphrase of something I posted as a reply on Facebook. It was about the CEO of Chick-Fil-A. I realize that most of these people who are against gay marriage aren't really thinking their belief thoroughly or completely through. I really don't believe that most of those are thinking "I am against gay marriage because I hate gays". They are saying "I want to keep marriage traditional". And by not thinking it through, they don't realize that they are not separating what they want from the rights of other people.
They don't realize about legal issues of people together for a lifetime and not being able to make decisions about their significant other- not being able to see the person if they person is incapacitated, not being able to make any decisions regarding a funeral if their S. O. has died, and all that.
If we all just think these things through, then maybe we can stop all this insanity and all these battles.

Any other thoughts?

I wish that all those who are against gay marriage would really think it through. Try to separate what you want from what people are truly asking for. Start thinking about others.

Many people don't want to "think it through" because they can hide behind religion to do as many negative things to gay people that they can because they don't "like" anything "gay".
What %? Hard to tell.
I wonder what "tradition" they are trying to keep anyway?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Whether gay marriage is right or wrong, why would gay couples choose to be married by an institution which is against what they are doing anyway? Why not just use a civil ceremony?

I highly doubt there are many same-sex couples fighting for the right to be married in a church, temple, mosque, etc, that opposes same sex marriage.

What they want is the right to be legally married, as in, recognized by the state as a couple bound by the same marriage contract afforded to heterosexual couples.

There are many houses of worship that will willingly perform such ceremonies, along with civil ceremonies and state registered ministers who perform marriage cermonies outside of houses of worship.

 

[ChristineES]

Simple question. If a Christian is against homosexual marriage they are filled with hatred?

I covered this. But, no, not necessarily. some could be. It is an individual thing- each person is going to have different reasons for not wanting it. Sometimes it's fear, sometimes it is people don't like change, or maybe some of them are saying "nyah, nyah, I can married and you can't!" And many other reasons.

 

[ChristineES]

Its not by the hand of man one has freedom--true freedom came from God,He gave us free will, and yes they can choose the path to gay marriage if they choose, I was only pointing out what both sides of the scale looks like. But also if one is a christian they must choose the path opposite of what God says he will not accept.

We can't expect non-Christians to follow Christian doctrine. Some people see nothing wrong with fornication-- but the Bible tells us that people who fornicate are obligated to get married. We can tell other Christians what we believe to be a sin, but I think it would be irrelevant to tell a non-Christian what is a sin or not a sin. Think about it this way: What if vegetarians tried to make it a law that no one could eat meat? Some people believe eating meat is murder- do you share that value? The thing is, you don't have to.

Jesus told His apostles that if someone rejected the message to leave them alone (and shaking the dust from their sandals). I think that's what we should do. (Edit: When I say this, I mean leave them alone about the scripture, not as a person).

 

[ChristineES]

If you think of marriage is only a Christian thing, then by your definition, no one but Christians could get married. My husband talked about this one day-- he told me that only Christians and Jews should get married. I countered him by saying "Other religions have marriages,too. I've seen Buddhist weddings on TV, for example". He didn't really have a reply. He wondered why marriage would be important to an atheist, I told him that just because someone doesn't believe in God doesn't mean they don't want to joined to another person. (Yes, my husband is a conservative-- we do have some major differences)

 

[javajo]

The ot laws have been done away with, Jesus came and made a new covenant. The covenant of Love.

Exactly my point.

Sounds to me like Jesus said he came to fulfill prophecy, not change what laws are to be followed.

I believe he fulfilled prophecy. The Law shows us we are sinners without hope. Christ's death makes those who trust him dead as far as the power of the law is concerned. The NT basically repeats all ten commandments except the 4th.

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: Eph. 2

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Rom. 3

Paul does not say the Law is bad, it is good, but by the Law we find we are sinners, the penalty being death. So Christ died, paying the penalty and so all who trust him are dead as far as the power of the Law is concerned. Like if a man dies, his wife is now free to marry whom she will.

I highly doubt there are many same-sex couples fighting for the right to be married in a church, temple, mosque, etc, that opposes same sex marriage.

What they want is the right to be legally married, as in, recognized by the state as a couple bound by the same marriage contract afforded to heterosexual couples.

There are many houses of worship that will willingly perform such ceremonies, along with civil ceremonies and state registered ministers who perform marriage cermonies outside of houses of worship.

Yup. I can understand folks, who, for conscience sake from their beliefs would not want to be forced to perform a gay marriage, (and I don't know why anyone would want to be married in a place that does not condone the marriage), but they should not take away the rights of people who want to have their marriage recognized at least as a civil marriage or union by the government so they may have all the rights of any other married couple. Its no different than the right of any employee to not be harassed or whatnot because of their gender, age, race or sexual orientation. Is it that hard for people to see that?

 

[dawny0826]

This is a paraphrase of something I posted as a reply on Facebook. It was about the CEO of Chick-Fil-A. I realize that most of these people who are against gay marriage aren't really thinking their belief thoroughly or completely through. I really don't believe that most of those are thinking "I am against gay marriage because I hate gays". They are saying "I want to keep marriage traditional". And by not thinking it through, they don't realize that they are not separating what they want from the rights of other people.
They don't realize about legal issues of people together for a lifetime and not being able to make decisions about their significant other- not being able to see the person if they person is incapacitated, not being able to make any decisions regarding a funeral if their S. O. has died, and all that.
If we all just think these things through, then maybe we can stop all this insanity and all these battles.

Any other thoughts?

I wish that all those who are against gay marriage would really think it through. Try to separate what you want from what people are truly asking for. Start thinking about others.

Unfortunately, I think that there are people, perhaps even well meaning people, who believe so staunchly that things are wrong, according to their religious beliefs, that they will not change their opinions or attempt to rationalize because they're only capable of accepting what they know to be "right".

My former mother in law, in example, I tried to have this same conversation with her. She believes so strongly that homosexuality is sinful and that it's so dangerous to traditional marriage, she can't see or understand anything beyond this box that she lives in when it comes to this topic. She preaches of mercy and love but justifies her own self righteousness when it comes to this and other topics.

She will swear that I'm worshipping a different God because I don't believe as she believes. It's pointless. To argue. To try to make sense of it. She and many others have their views of what God accepts and doesn't accept and they preach it and stand up, for and against that which they believe is for and/or against God.

Sometimes, it's genuine bigotry and hatefulness and other times, people seem to be a product of years of influence and seem to be fueled by their own self rigtheousness. You can't reach people when they care more about themselves than the well being of others.

 

[ChristineES]

Exactly my point.

I believe he fulfilled prophecy. The Law shows us we are sinners without hope. Christ's death makes those who trust him dead as far as the power of the law is concerned. The NT basically repeats all ten commandments except the 4th.

12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
16 And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: Eph. 2

19 Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.
20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.
21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;
22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;
24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Rom. 3

Paul does not say the Law is bad, it is good, but by the Law we find we are sinners, the penalty being death. So Christ died, paying the penalty and so all who trust him are dead as far as the power of the Law is concerned. Like if a man dies, his wife is now free to marry whom she will.

Yup. I can understand folks, who, for conscience sake from their beliefs would not want to be forced to perform a gay marriage, (and I don't know why anyone would want to be married in a place that does not condone the marriage), but they should not take away the rights of people who want to have their marriage recognized at least as a civil marriage or union by the government so they may have all the rights of any other married couple. Its no different than the right of any employee to not be harassed or whatnot because of their gender, age, race or sexual orientation. Is it that hard for people to see that?

You said that so well. It's all about Civil Marriage (what I meant by legal marriage). I don't see anyone trying to force people who would feel that they were condoning what they see as a sin- there are some Christian denominations who would perform the ceremony, as well as some other religious organizations, and the Justice of the Peace. What you said was totally right-- Most people would not want to be married in a place where their sexual preference is not accepted (I believe that most people aren't against the people themselves, just that one thing-- but I do know some people believe that if you don't accept everything about them, you may as well be saying you don't accept them at all).

 

[jasonwill2]

It most certainly is the breeding ground of hate, R.

Saying it's wrong to be gay, to be a woman, to be left-handed, to be a dwarf, to have three nipples, to have darker skin, to be bald, to be too old, to be chairbound, to be bedridden, etc.....if people think being that way is something wrong or in error with what "nature intended" (however one defines nature), it's prejudiced.

Hate and fear is an extension from ignorance, and prejudiced views are the bridge between to the two. It's just one step closer to advocating for that group's rights in being active members of society to be rescinded.

I should note that one can be informed and not ignorant, and still hate a group.

Whether gay marriage is right or wrong, why would gay couples choose to be married by an institution which is against what they are doing anyway? Why not just use a civil ceremony?

Not all religions are against it, and many cultures have marriages that are polygamous, and in many ancient times bisexuality was a norm.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Whether gay marriage is right or wrong, why would gay couples choose to be married by an institution which is against what they are doing anyway? Why not just use a civil ceremony?

Some religions do allow it. If our state allowed gay marriage I know one Episcopalian priest that would gladly wed gay couples. And many neo-Pagan religions are accepting of homosexuals.

 

[jasonwill2]

Some religions do allow it. If our state allowed gay marriage I know one Episcopalian priest that would gladly wed gay couples. And many neo-Pagan religions are accepting of homosexuals.

Satanism condoned all forms of consensual adult sexual activity before it was cool.

 

[Me Myself]

Satanism condoned all forms of consensual adult sexual activity before it was cool.

your specific current and understanding of Satanism, when was it born? I mean as a religion.

 

[jasonwill2]

your specific current and understanding of Satanism, when was it born? I mean as a religion.

I was refering to LaVeyan Satanism, I can't say when Theistic Satanism first started exactly, or when they actively condoned it, but I would think that homosexuality would be a non-issue to pre-1966 Satanists.

 

[That one dude...]

What if its all the above?

Perhaps their faith motivates them to see homosexuality as an unnatural thing in society and they feel that its truly wrong to be gay. We are talking about an honest belief that being gay is wrong. Is that hate?

If they truly see it as wrong, then no, it isn't hatred of those who live that way. It's 'love the sinner, hate the sin', which is very self-serving as it puts them on a supposed moral high ground. This is why you have things like 'pray the gay away', because they look down on the sin, not the sinner, and want to help them out of it.

 

[Jainarayan]

Maybe I had too much caffeine at lunch, but I want to comment on my own post.

What about the following marriages (all at age 18+)

Father - Daughter
Father - Son
Mother - Son
Mother - Daughter
Brother - Sister
Brother - Brother
SIster - Sister
Grandfather - Grand daughter
First Cousin - First Cousin (same sex)
First Cousin - First Cousin (opposite sex)
You - someone else's spouse (polygamy of all sexual combinations)
etc. - etc.


Well, I'm thinking we should leave the laws the way they are. No gay marriage for starters. As I said in an earlier post, I'm not a homophobe or hater.

Who knows what some off-the -wall sect will claim as their right in the marriage realm. Why should our ancient morals apply to them, they'll say.

Two reasons those marriages are not permitted or necessary, and are redundant:

1. There is already a legal kinship established. Marriage is a legal contract for the inheritance and protection of joint assets and medical care, among a host of other rights and benefits. In the absence of a legal spouse, a parent can make medical decisions for adult offspring. Consider the Terry Schiavo case. Were she not married, her parents would have had no resistance to keeping her artificially alive. Were she not married, and they wanted her care terminated, they would have that right.

2. Marriage is restricted to kinship relations beyond a certain degree of consanguinity based on genetics. The Amish of Pennsylvania have a higher than normal average of polydactylism. The Amish community is descended from a few founders. A population in Brazil has an inordinate number of blond-haired, blue-eyed twins. A proposed theory was tha they were the result of Josef Mengele's genetic experiments. Not so, the population descends from a very small gene pool in which the aforementioned traits manifest.

The rampant genetic defects, especially hemophilia which plagued the royal houses of Europe (and Russia) were the result of inbreeding. History has shown that close consanguinal relationships manifest genetic abnormalities.

Personally I have nothing against polygamy or polyandry. Though I think most people find one spouse more than sufficient. Some find one spouse to be one spouse too many. Count me as a member of that camp.