Is there any REASON gay marriage is wrong?

[j0frenzy]

I'm a Christian, and despite what some of the fundamentalist dinosaurs may shout, I think that if any two people wish to come together in love to become one in spirit, friendship and love, then that's a blessed union.

The whole thing with marriage of two people is that they fill you in where you are weak, mentally, emotionally and you do the same for them. It's a process of yin and yang coming together to make something better than the two separate. This is always a good thing, regardless of the state of their genetic makeup.

Woah woah woah. Dinosaurs aren't real. They are a communist plant to turn America away from God. Nuggets of wisdom I got growing up in the South.
I see no reason. I like people being treated equally under the law when there is no reason for them not to be.

 

[DaJoW]

(Before reading, please note that I AM in favor of gay marriage, in case you're very thick and don't get that right away)

You might hear people go on about how "Gay marriage is wrong", and "How it shoud be illegal" and so on. But I've yet to hear an objective reason for the case. They sometimes try to justify their position with "It would hurt regular marriage", but this is far fetched at best and a flat out lie at worst.

Fortunately these forums tend to be pretty open-minded on the matter, but if you happen to disagree with me, I'd very much like to hear a good, solid, factual reason to support your position.

EDIT: Lol, I finaly caught on to the error in the title X). I originally wanted it to say "would be" instead of "is" but forgot to delete the "be".

Personally I fond only one thing wrong with gay marriage.

The bible says that homo-sexuality is a sin, right? SO if we force a priest to perform a same-sex wedding, we force him/her to bless sin, and I don't think that's fair to the priest.

No one would be forcing priests to marry anyone. That doesn't make any sense.

Here in Finland, a few years ago a priest was fired because he refused to work with female priests. If gay marriage were approved by the law, priests refusing to perform them would no doubt be fired also. This in my opinion is forcing them.

The Church of Sweden allows gay marriage but each individual priest can choose not to perform such services. Seems like a good solution to me, though the Church of Finland may be run in a different way.

 

[Mark Hardigan]

From a finite reason standpoint, yes and no. Two men or two women cannot reproduce, so from a procreation standpoint it isn't the "best" option. From a regular reason standpoint of whether one type of marriage is better than another, there is nothing wrong with it.

Most arguments against gay marriage can really be summarized with "my god is better than your god." Only the "Two men/women cannot reproduce," holds any type of weight, and even that has glaring holes since marriage in human society is just as much about love and commitment as procreation since many married couples have the intention to never have children.

Basically it's the religious right having the massively arrogant idea that they have a monopoly on marriage. Marriage has been around for a lot longer than organized religion has. Nobody has a monopoly on it.

For the record, I support gay marriage.

 

[Rockchimp69]

Gay people cannot reproduce, therefore they shouldn't get married or have sex ever.

So the only point of marriage and sex is to have children? Does that mean that people should only be allowed to get married if they have a child and people shouldn't be allowed to use things like condoms which allow people to have sex for fun?

Yes, that is the point. Condoms are evil and morally reprehensible.

I can't tell if you're serious or not.. please clarify.

 

[ItsAChiaotzu]

Gay people cannot reproduce, therefore they shouldn't get married or have sex ever.

So the only point of marriage and sex is to have children? Does that mean that people should only be allowed to get married if they have a child and people shouldn't be allowed to use things like condoms which allow people to have sex for fun?

Yes, that is the point. Condoms are evil and morally reprehensible.

I can't tell if you're serious or not.. please clarify.

Dead Serious.

 

[BKtheKITTY]

Man speaks the truth. Did you know that the leading cause of tsunamis is people not saying their prayers? Yet more fun facts. I yank not your chain. And I heard this at a cathedral.

I'd just like to say that God strongly disagrees with what those people are saying. Because that phrase is trapping the listeners in shame and guilt that them not saying prayers as much as they should caused the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands. This fear, shame and guilt-mongering is exactly the type of thing Jesus came to rescue us all from. So they are in fact saying things totally anathema to their supposed faith.

I would just ask that you don't see that as the Christian message because they genuinely aren't preaching it, they've seriously missed the point. It's a Christians job to love and help people regardless of who they are in whatever situation they are in, not to say stuff like that. The unfortunate thing is that this stuff get's said in one place and it's then all over the world with people saying 'thats what the Christians think about this'. It genuinely isn't, my heart felt like it was going to stop when I saw those tsunami images because I could literally feel their pain but not out of guilt, because those humans were suffering, pure and simple.

You probably think i'm an idiot, but like that stuff really irritates you and gets you mad, it does the same to me because that's what the Christian message is being seen as when it really isn't that at all! *sigh*

Dude, the only things you should ever take from life are the good bits, the bits that get you by. Jesus said to be nice to people, and damnit the man was right. Keeping faith to the bare bones of being a good person, hell I love it, Methodists tickle my pickle, but as with any and all things, now and then some silly sausage is going to rock on up and use it as an excuse for people not to do things, to name a scapegoat, to make some more flipping money. God's message is love, that's indisputable. The church's message, however... People take it too far. So no, I don't think you're an idiot, I think the world needs more right thinkin' people like yourself.

Edit: Feel free to relish in my overuse of the word 'Think' in that last sentence. It was a good day for an all nighter.

 

[Griffolion]

I'm a Christian, and despite what some of the fundamentalist dinosaurs may shout, I think that if any two people wish to come together in love to become one in spirit, friendship and love, then that's a blessed union.

The whole thing with marriage of two people is that they fill you in where you are weak, mentally, emotionally and you do the same for them. It's a process of yin and yang coming together to make something better than the two separate. This is always a good thing, regardless of the state of their genetic makeup.

Woah woah woah. Dinosaurs aren't real. They are a communist plant to turn America away from God. Nuggets of wisdom I got growing up in the South.
I see no reason. I like people being treated equally under the law when there is no reason for them not to be.

Haha just to clarify I do indeed know that dinosaurs actually existed, I'm not one of those "NO, THE EARTH IS 4000 YEARS OLD" people. I know you were joking, but I just wanted to clarify my position . And yeah, equality is the ultimate goal here.

 

[Spineyguy]

This is the most interesting conundrum for me on the issue, actually. Marriage is traditionally a religious ceremony so should they have to put up with their concept being redefined? Then again, plenty of atheists get married. And then what about liberal churches which WANT gay marriage? There are a few in my city who religiously acknowledge gay relationships. The Metropolitan Fellowship, for example, is a Christian denomination that maintains all couples are universally positive so long as they're loving and monogamous.

Personally I think the easiest solution would be to remove all legal recognition of marriage and replace the legal part with civil unions for everyone, gay or straight. Then give the ceremony of marriage back to religion, and let each individual church decide who they will or won't marry. The sanctity of marriage is maintained (actually restored, as it will no longer be controlled by the state) and the civil rights issue is resolved. And no more legislators essentially declaring which religious beliefs are more valid than others.

I would still be inclined to say that people would not be happy with this. While the C of E currently upholds a culture of discretion about Civil partnerships, where individual clergymen can decide whether to bless ceremonies or not, regardless of the sexuality of those involved, there are many other faiths and sects that would be in uproar if the protection of the Church by law were changed. Sickening though it is, religion and the legal system are still very much intertwined and separating them is not going to be easy, nor will it be quick.

For now, the best solution I can see is to keep the two concepts separate, let the believers sit by while the rest of the world move on, faith must be allowed to move at its own pace, or we show that we are just as capable of forcing views onto people as they are.

 

[Griffolion]

Man speaks the truth. Did you know that the leading cause of tsunamis is people not saying their prayers? Yet more fun facts. I yank not your chain. And I heard this at a cathedral.

I'd just like to say that God strongly disagrees with what those people are saying. Because that phrase is trapping the listeners in shame and guilt that them not saying prayers as much as they should caused the death and displacement of hundreds of thousands. This fear, shame and guilt-mongering is exactly the type of thing Jesus came to rescue us all from. So they are in fact saying things totally anathema to their supposed faith.

I would just ask that you don't see that as the Christian message because they genuinely aren't preaching it, they've seriously missed the point. It's a Christians job to love and help people regardless of who they are in whatever situation they are in, not to say stuff like that. The unfortunate thing is that this stuff get's said in one place and it's then all over the world with people saying 'thats what the Christians think about this'. It genuinely isn't, my heart felt like it was going to stop when I saw those tsunami images because I could literally feel their pain but not out of guilt, because those humans were suffering, pure and simple.

You probably think i'm an idiot, but like that stuff really irritates you and gets you mad, it does the same to me because that's what the Christian message is being seen as when it really isn't that at all! *sigh*

Dude, the only things you should ever take from life are the good bits, the bits that get you by. Jesus said to be nice to people, and damnit the man was right. Keeping faith to the bare bones of being a good person, hell I love it, Methodists tickle my pickle, but as with any and all things, now and then some silly sausage is going to rock on up and use it as an excuse for people not to do things, to name a scapegoat, to make some more flipping money. God's message is love, that's indisputable. The church's message, however... People take it too far. So no, I don't think you're an idiot, I think the world needs more right thinkin' people like yourself.

Thanks, I appreciate your words. I just find it really sad that a lot of people get so caught up in what 'the church' says when it's about a million miles from what true Christianity is. And what 'the church' says is what everyone sees the entirety of Christianity as believing. If you ever find a person claiming to be a Christian who is being judgemental or otherwise trapping people in fear, doubt or uncertainty in who they are, kindly tell them that what they are doing is the thing Jesus, the man they follow, came to rescue the whole earth from. It's our job to love, not to judge.

 

[CarlMin]

I can find no reason why it would hurt me or society in general if we embraced all kinds of love. I have biases but I'm not about to let them blind me.

That rather depends. Pedophilia should probably still be outlawed.

 

[Matt King]

the main argument i have heard is that "it isn't natural" and that eventually everyone will be gay and humanity will be fucked but most people i know don't have a problem with it not even the christian ones like myself

 

[spartan231490]

The only real reasons are religious in nature. God smiting and all that. Don't put much faith in it myself, but most religions don't make sense to me.

I'll disagree with that statement. The most vocal arguments have to do with religion. You know, what's covered on the news. Don't put much faith in networks, most of them don't make sense.

Ok, what are the other arguments? What purely logical argument is there against gay marriage?

 

[flamingjimmy]

Well, scientifically speaking homosexuals being together does nothing to further the human species and actually leads to diseases. There are no real reasons why it should be allowed in terms of science.

Total bollocks.

Firstly, homosexuality must have some sort of advantage because otherwise it wouldn't exist, it would have died out thousands of generations ago.

For example if you examine female relatives of gay men you tend to find that they have more children than normal. The same genetic factors that make some men gay also make women more fertile.

What diseases does homosexuality lead to? Unsafe sex leads to diseases, but that is not an argument against gay marriage, it is an argument against sleeping around, whatever your sexual orientation.

Finally, even if it was true that homosexuals being together does nothing to 'further the human species' (whatever on earth you mean by that incredibly vague and ill defined notion) and that homosexuality leads to diseases that would still not amount to a scientific reason that homosexuals should not marry.

You're abusing thew english language, and trying to hijack scientific language to justify your prejudice.

 

[Dana22]

I think God's word is more important than your own personal preferences.

(..) neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. Levi 19:19

You may want to check your pants bro.

 

[Your once and future Fanboy]

Well..In some faiths they belive it to be wrong, but then again, in the same religion they say you should never get devourced, be hanged for working on a sunday, that all illnesses are caused by demonic possesion, to sell your wife or oldest daughter into prostitution if you are low on money and stone disobedient children. (note that I don't specify the religion, so that i won't be flamed by those people)

So there are no reason to follow the religous hate of the homosexuals if we don't follow the other teachings.

 

[Shycte]

The amount of I'm not homophobic but.... Here is lulzworthy, and sad.

I don't think that we should force any religous institution to bless any marrige that is against their religon, but if we are talking non-religous marriges then there no reason at all why you shouldn't allow it. Religon doesn't have a say here so Levictus can go throw itself in a bin.

No state should ever have the right to say that "Group X" can not do this, but "Group Y" can. That is a spit in the face to democracy and all the equality of men we have ever fought for. Remember, first they came for the communists...

 

[IamGamer41]

So if someone believes that is its morally wrong for two men or women to be married is a homophobe? Even though they were raised in a good household with family values and learned to make up their own minds about things, They are still wrong and homophobic because they disagree with that kind of lifestyle.

Religion is part of the problem but some people who are not religions don't agree with it and don't want to see it.Ive been told people are born gay,that is not a choice people make.Well the same is said for straight people.Its in their nature to want to be with the opposite sex so anything other then that feels wrong.

 

[Thy Doctor]

My god why does everyone think if your religious, your Jewish. Leviticus is part of the Torah and Majority of present day Christian religions ignore the entire book. Actually a majority of religions only us the new testament(the Jesus bit) for the rules and such. Hell of the top of my head I can't think of one christen religion that still requires circumcison, no religion requires sacrifices, and no religion stones there sinners. The rules in nearly all religions about gays are established by tradition. Hell the catholic church actually doesn't have a problem with gays. They support homosexual people but they dont support homosexual sexual relations because once again like a majority of religions sex is reserved for marriage. Lutherans have actually the same belief too and I believe baptists and Methodists do too.

I studied religion for way to long haha

 

[Griffolion]

I think God's word is more important than your own personal preferences.

(..) neither shall a garment mingled of linen and woolen come upon thee. Levi 19:19

You may want to check your pants bro.

You gotta love Leviticus! Loads of weird commands in there haha . But if you read it contextually to the people God was giving that command to. Those individuals had only just won their freedom from the Egyptians. Up until that time they were living under the rule of the Egyptians and so did not know how to function independently as their own society. Those commands, as strange as they are, were God's (very temporary) way of helping them function as a society. Also remember that those people were only a fraction above barbaric in terms of philosophy and thought, so stuff had to be kept simple for them to understand and carry out. I'm guessing that command regarding linen and wool had something perhaps to do with the way they fabricated linen and woolen garments and mingling the two may cause an unfavourable reaction with the skin that would cause them to become ill. It's the same with the command of eating pork. It wasn't allowed for a while because it was a forbidden animal by the Lord. This probably wasn't some arbitrary rule from God, it was more than likely due to the fact that their hygiene methods meant cooking and eating pork was a death sentence in terms of infection and food poisoning. But you couldn't explain that to a barely civilised bunch of people haha .

But a lot of what was in the Old Testament is, as you say and know, quite irrelevant to modern life now. The Old Testament should only ever serve as the background story of man's separation from God through rebellion and the violence and evil that all humans are capable of. It paves the way for the beautiful rescue and reconciliation story found in the New Testament in the story of Jesus. There are many golden nuggets of philosophy and thought in there, but most of it is just irrelevant rules, wars and king bloodlines!