Is there any REASON gay marriage is wrong?

[Gluzzbung]

You've got to understand that when you talk of marriage you are explicitly talking about the church and what they say in their private forum goes so we can't pressure them to change, saying that disallowing gay marriage is morally wrong, we have to just present them with the facts and let their concience decide. When talking about gay coupling I have no problem with it. Many of us however say they are fine with gay couples but yet are repulsed by two people of the same sex kissing when they see it. We seem to want the badge but aren't prepared to pay the fee. I do fall into this catagory, I would rather they keep their sensual thoughts to their own privacy and I know that sounds very biggoted but I can't help it and don't think Ill ever be able to.

 

[Valdus]

"If you allow Gay marriage, any random two people could claim they are married for tax purposes. Marriage already gives you a big tax break in this country (which is true) and letting two roommates or a couple of guys get 'married' would kill tax revenue, as this would let people 'marry' regardless if they were actually gay or not."

So it's okay for a guy and girl to screw over the tax system, but when it's two guys or two girls?

That right there is my argument for gay marriage. There are plenty of mixed gender couples that get married for the wrong reasons, so why should we restrict same sex couples who want to get married for the right ones?

 

[Gigano]

...

I live in a country where Muslims demand we bomb your country, and when we refuse they riot in the streets telling us that Mohammed is going to bomb us. No one is arrested.

Kind of a separate issue there; I'm sure we can find common ground in denouncing Muslim fundamentalists and their violent ways, as well as a notion that death threats and incitement of violence should be dealt with harshly, be they religiously motivated or not.

A nurse offers to pray for a patient on his death bed. He complains, she loses her job.

A Christian couple who own a BnB have a policy where they don't allow unmarried couples to share a room but they'll give them two rooms for the same price as the single. A gay couples this as an entirely homophobic rule and takes them to court. They win. They then try and sue AGAIN but halt the case due to the reaction of the general public.

Perhaps your society isn't quite as ridiculously unbalanced as mine.

Well, considering that Christians are no better in their desire to discriminate gay people, I find it hard to pity them. If they won't help secure equal rights for everyone, why would anyone care about them when they lose out?

If you want general support for legislation that accommodates for your religious views, then reasonably you'll have to support legislation that accommodate for other lifestyles as well.

Agreed, regardless of who it's imposed upon.

So yes to the state (if not the church) recognizing gay marriage then?

 

[The Gnome King]

(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".

Short answer:
No, there is no reason gays should not be able to get married. Period.


But...


The slightly longer answer I have is "why is government involved with marriage *at all* for *any reason* ...?"

I think that the US government, state and national, should get out of the business of marriage completely and recognize ONLY civil unions. Let each individual church "marry" people as they see fit, since marriage is a religious institution.

My wife and I were "married" by a Justice of the Peace - what kind of sense does that even make? A judge married us, in a courtroom. Why shouldn't that have been called a "civil union" and recognized as such, and if we *wanted* a marriage recognized, by, say, a Catholic Church or Mormon Temple we would then have to go and have it done there?

In my ideal society I would let the government handle and recognize only civil unions, for heterosexual and homosexual couples both - and let each individual religion handle marriage however the Hell it wants to. Free-market religion/marriage, we could call it. If your church/religion wanted to "marry" homosexuals - great! They would attract offerings and tithes from homosexuals and people who supported that viewpoint. If they didn't want to marry homosexuals - fine! They would no longer have them as a source of income.

I'm a bisexual male, FWIW.

 

[ABLb0y]

Could someone please explain to me how Gay Marriage could possibly ruin "Normal" Marriage? Because that's about the only argument homophobes have against it.

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

I say go for it. Less competition.

Joking aside I take the same stance on homosexuality as I do religion. Don't preach to me because I don't give two flying shits, don't try to convert me because I don't give two flying shits, and lastly, I DON'T GIVE TWO FLYING SHITS!

That's my rant for the day.

Hope you enjoyed reading.

Peace.

 

[dex-dex]

In Canada, where I live it is already legal.
I don't see a problem with it because as my friend's dad said " they should be able to get married. I mean they should not get a pass of losing half their stuff in a divorce." note my friend's dad is also very sarcastic and cynical.
the even worse thing is saying that gay parents should not adopt because the children will become gay. If you walk in on your parents doing the lovings not many of them are going to say YEAH THAT"S WHAT I'M GOING TO DO WITH MY LIFE!

 

[Th37thTrump3t]

Could someone please explain to me how Gay Marriage could possibly ruin "Normal" Marriage? Because that's about the only argument homophobes have against it.

Because marriage is a "holy sacrament" which may have been the case maybe say... 40-50 years ago. But in the days of being able to get married in Vegas and getting divorced just because the sex isn't good enough for you, honestly that argument holds absolutely no water.

 

[Cavehybrid]

yeh just let them do what they want to do. If the "no abortions ever" brigade ever win then we need childless couples to adopt the masses of unwanted poor little orphans.

 

[Eldarion]

(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.

Well I don't know what the law is like in Finland.

 

[The Gnome King]

If you say "I'm a Christian" then refuse to acknowledge something your Holy book says then you're not really being a Christian are you. If God speaks through it and says that homosexuality is wrong, turning round and saying "homosexuality is right" is completely contradicting what you're own chosen belief system says. You're choosing the label but not the belief.

There's not a single part in the old or new testaments that says homosexuality is alright, in four separate places (that I can think of) it says the opposite.

All Christians pick and choose what they wish to believe from their holy books. I don't know any Christians, for example, still following the Leviticus prohibitions against shellfish or mixing blends of fibers when making clothing, for example.

Other Bible verses Christians ignore today:

"Women should be silent in the churches, for they are not permitted to speak, but should be submissive, as the law also says." (1 Corinthians 14:34)

"Judge for yourselves: Is it proper for a woman to pray to God with her head uncovered? Does not even nature itself teach you that if a man has long hair it is a disgrace to him, but that if a woman has long hair, it is her glory? For her hair is given to her as a covering." (1 Corinthians 11:13-15)

"If any man takes a wife, and goes in on her, and detests her, and charges her with shameful conduct, and brings a bad name on her, and says, 'I took this woman, and when I came to her I found she was not a virgin..." (Deuteronomy 22:13,14)

"But if ... evidences of virginity are not found for the young woman, then they shall bring out the young woman to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her to death with stones..." (Deuteronomy 22:20,21)

And many, many others, like:

Lev 1:9
Lev 11:10
Lev 19:27
Lev 21:20
Lev. 25:44

Exodus 21:7
Exodus 35:2

Show me One.Single.Christian alive today who claims to follow EVERYTHING that the Bible teaches. He or she would likely be in jail, if he or she followed, say, Deuteronomy 22:20,21.

Just sayin'

Jesus DID however speak a LOT about love, turning the other cheek, not being nasty, not judging... etc.

 

[pieguy259]

I think its wrong because I believe its unnatural, that is all.

Amazing! How did you manage to type that without a computer, an internet connection and a house?

 

[LitleWaffle]

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

Men cannot reproduce, which means that sex between two males will not produce any offspring.

OT: For the United States(since I live there), people say that it would infringe on traditional marriage.

However, that argument is quite odd, since the divorce rate is at an all time high without any relation to homosexuality.

PS: Frankly, I have no information on other countries and how they are handling gay marriage, and I apologize for my ignorance.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Jesus DID however speak a LOT about love, turning the other cheek, not being nasty, not judging... etc.

It's funny how so many "Christians" seemed to have missed that part. If we were going to follow any part of the Bible, why couldn't it have been that part? Honestly, divine or not, Jesus as he is described in the Bible seems like the most awesome, chill person who ever lived. Now if only more of his so called followers could be more like him.

EDIT: lol, I just realized, does Jesus strike anyone as what we might now call a hippie? Granted, without the drugs and the laziness, but as far as the whole philosophy of all people living together in peace, he's right up there with Wavy Gravy.

 

[Duskflamer]

I thought about putting this in my initial post but couldn't think of how to word it just right.
I do not aprove of it, but realize not everyone is christian and have the right to believe in what they want. It's like having a friend, or in this case a fellow human being, who you see doing something you know is wrong but they won't listen to you. Now I, once again, find myself searching for a proper sentence to say "I care, but I know people won't understand why I care" because as a christian I'm just trying to prevent them from going to hell, but they don't believe in hell so... I don't know what to say.

Alright, that is a somewhat valid argument (I remember learning something at some point about how christians have an obligation to 'save' people. Granted I heard that mostly in that it was used as an excuse to wipe out entire civilizations in the Americas but I digress).

Here's the thing though, let's assume for the moment you're wrong. I know you believe you're right, I'm not saying you're not right. But for the sake of argument, let's say you're wrong. There is no God (or, there is a God but not the Christian God), there is no hell for 'sinners,' there is no 'heaven' for the faithful. If we accept this for the sake of argument, then what have you accomplished by forcing others to conform to your ideals? Nothing except making someone else's life miserable for something you thought was true.

Also, assuming everything in the bible is correct, did God not give us free will? Are we as humans not free to choose our own fate? Make all the arguments you like, do your best to convert people to christianity, but there is no reason to impede on the free will of people who a staunchly opposed to Christianity, and you'd have more success trying to save people who are less adamant about the issue.

I appreciate your sensitivity, but I'm an understanding man and I hope you don't read this as me blowing up in your face
you seem to have this idea that christians are all zealots. I tried to say I had trouble wording that sentence because even what I ended up submitting misses that I don't want to force it. I tried to use the example of watching a friend do something you think is wrong because thats is what its like. I personally would never force someone to believe in something they don't want to. That never truly saves people. I believe the only real way to save people is to let them do what they think is right first. I, as a christian, believe God will uphold his rules, and when sinners defy him they will not be happy people. Then when they are confused, hurt, and not sure where they went wrong, that is when you go in and talk to them. Tell them that the reason they screwed up their life was because they were constantly doing things that God thought was wrong. My christian fellowship, at least, does not have strict, intimidating, "we're better than you" ideals, we simply do the right thing, such as not drinking, lying, cheating, stealing, fighting, killing, or, for the sake of this thread, having homosexual sex.
A forceful zealot christian has misread the bible because they did not pick up on what you already have when you're not even a christain.
A really good christian simply tells people what they need to hear when they've hit rock bottom and need help. That will truly convert more souls than an inquisition ever will.

That is actually a very reasonably road to take, however it doesn't give you a lot of ground to stand on with the main issue here. Namely, if you don't want to 'force' people to convert to Christianity, then why try to impose Christian law on non-Christians? (through banning same-sex marriage.)

 

[The Gnome King]

Jesus DID however speak a LOT about love, turning the other cheek, not being nasty, not judging... etc.

It's funny how so many "Christians" seemed to have missed that part. If we were going to follow any part of the Bible, why couldn't it have been that part? Honestly, divine or not, Jesus as he is described in the Bible seems like the most awesome, chill person who ever lived. Now if only more of his so called followers could be more like him.

EDIT: lol, I just realized, does Jesus strike anyone as what we might now call a hippie? Granted, without the drugs and the laziness, but as far as the whole philosophy of all people living together in peace, he's right up there with Wavy Gravy.

Jesus Christ, I am convinced, would be the biggest liberal democrat socialist alive today. If he were alive today.

He would *not* hang out with conservatives. Or the tea-party.

In fact I think he had a few choice quotes about how hard it is to get into Haven as a rich man...

 

[Jonabob87]

...

I live in a country where Muslims demand we bomb your country, and when we refuse they riot in the streets telling us that Mohammed is going to bomb us. No one is arrested.

Kind of a separate issue there; I'm sure we can find common ground in denouncing Muslim fundamentalists and their violent ways, as well as a notion that death threats and incitement of violence should be dealt with harshly, be they religiously motivated or not.

A nurse offers to pray for a patient on his death bed. He complains, she loses her job.

A Christian couple who own a BnB have a policy where they don't allow unmarried couples to share a room but they'll give them two rooms for the same price as the single. A gay couples this as an entirely homophobic rule and takes them to court. They win. They then try and sue AGAIN but halt the case due to the reaction of the general public.

Perhaps your society isn't quite as ridiculously unbalanced as mine.

Well, considering that Christians are no better in their desire to discriminate gay people, I find it hard to pity them. If they won't help secure equal rights for everyone, why would anyone care about them when they lose out?

If you want general support for legislation that accommodates for your religious views, then reasonably you'll have to support legislation that accommodate for other lifestyles as well.

Agreed, regardless of who it's imposed upon.

So yes to the state (if not the church) recognizing gay marriage then?

I've already said I have no problem with civil partnerships/state marriages. My problem is when people start demanding that churches marry gay couples.

I brought up the examples of Christian inequality because you seem to think that Christianity is the big boy who everyone bows down to and does what they're told.

 

[k-ossuburb]

It's no different than the idiots who opposed inter-racial marriages. Essentially, it's the same deal, I have absolutely no problem with anyone marrying anyone else regardless of age*, gender, race or beliefs.

Although, I do have a problem with marriage in general as I don't completely understand the point in it other than financial reasons and making things easier for the government when they turn you all into statistics. Not to say that I oppose it, I just think it's pointless.

*As long as the culture and law allow it, of course, but I was referring to people of, say 60 marrying someone of 20 (it happens, and I'm okay with that) but I wasn't referring to someone of 60 marrying someone of 6.

 

[Dense_Electric]

Jesus DID however speak a LOT about love, turning the other cheek, not being nasty, not judging... etc.

It's funny how so many "Christians" seemed to have missed that part. If we were going to follow any part of the Bible, why couldn't it have been that part? Honestly, divine or not, Jesus as he is described in the Bible seems like the most awesome, chill person who ever lived. Now if only more of his so called followers could be more like him.

EDIT: lol, I just realized, does Jesus strike anyone as what we might now call a hippie? Granted, without the drugs and the laziness, but as far as the whole philosophy of all people living together in peace, he's right up there with Wavy Gravy.

Jesus Christ, I am convinced, would be the biggest liberal democrat socialist alive today. If he were alive today.

He would *not* hang out with conservatives. Or the tea-party.

In fact I think he had a few choice quotes about how hard it is to get into Haven as a rich man...

Hah, he probably would have. Though I think the thing about getting into Heaven as a rich man had more to do with hording wealth than with simply accumulating it, but nonetheless you certainly have a good point.

 

[John the Gamer]

Nope. And I live in the Netherlands, which was incidentially the first country to legalize same-sex marriage. Yay for us! (Btw I'm not gay)