Opinion on same-sex marriage? Two of my closest friends, who happen to be Republican and conservative Christians, don't agree with me in the idea of allowing same-sex marriage. They believe same-sex marriage is unnatural and goes against the plan of God for men and women to form a family and have children. They believe gay marriage will ruin the sanctuary of marriage as a whole and that marriage will lose its original meaning. According to them, it has been an unchanged tradition since the days of Adam and Eve. I love my two friends dearly and respect them as human beings and especially their right to disagree with what I believe in myself. I don't remember who said this but made an excellent point in saying that people don't have to look each other in the eyes in order to walk and stand together. I find that to be very true as even though I stand more as a Democrat and a moderate I am still a good friend with my two Republican and conservative friends.
Having said that, I am not trying to be biased here at all and I have been looking into both sides of the argument against, and in favor, of two adults (who happen to be gay) getting married of which live in a free country that is not a theocracy with a Constitution that helps protect the rights of minorities from a majority’s rule. You would think that by me saying that same-sex marriage would be allowed but it is not. My friends explained to me the reasons why they believe it shouldn’t:
- Homosexuality is unnatural (meaning it is not found in nature and it is not normal or common)
- Same-sex marriage does not produce children
- Same-sex marriage destroys the sanctuary of marriage and it’s meaning
- Marriage has not been changed since the days of Adam and Eve
- Leviticus 20:13
Yet I disagree with them. Homosexual behavior is found in nature and it is quite common in a variety of groups of species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
The second point they make is that same-sex marriage does not produce children. Yet marriages between the elderly and couples who are sterile cannot produce children either. Should they not be allowed to get married either? They couldn't come up with an answer and told me they would ask their priest this Sunday.
Third point they both made was that same-sex marriage will destroy the sanctuary of marriage. It will ruin the original idea and plan of God for men and women to get married. But my point is – isn’t divorce what literally destroys the sanctuary of marriage? Why isn’t then divorce illegal and banned? It goes against the original plan of God for a holy union. It ends marriage.
Another point they made is that marriage has not been changed since the days of Adam and Eve. But actually, it has. The Loving v. Virginia case ruling in 1967 was a victory for civil rights that ended all racial-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. There were laws before, like the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 in Virginia, that forbid whites and non-whites to be legally married. Also, remember the old days when women were treated as property of men (Exodus 20:17)? That has changed too since. So marriage has been changed and for the better too.
Lastly, they mentioned, "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13). Obviously, that will never happen because today we see how wrong it is to murder someone. But why is it still used as 'proof' that homosexuality is unnatural and wrong? Three verses before this is Leviticus 20:9 that states, "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." Should we kill our children then who make this mistake? I think not but why is the homosexual quote used and not this last one? Why take one literally and not the other? I don't understand really to be completely honest.
What is your opinion on same-sex marriage? Should gay people even be allowed equal treatment under the law under civil unions? If yes, have we learned anything from the idea of “separate but equal”? Opinions please.
R & C N, yes! That's what I meant. Word caught it and made the suggestion to change it when I misspelled it and I just kept writing it like that afterwards. Thanks.
Butterflygirl, I whole-heartedly respect your opinion and if I stand in your shoes I understand what you are trying to say. But please, I ask you the favor of standing in my shoes and see where I am coming from as well.
There is nothing wrong in questioning. There is nothing wrong in trying to see the world from different points of view.
An Atheist Republican? Allow me to tell you that you're the first person that I have ever met who is both an Atheist and a Republican. I'm sorry to say but I come from a very small, rather conservative city down here in Texas. The internet is the only place where I can find diversity in people.
Having said that, I am not trying to be biased here at all and I have been looking into both sides of the argument against, and in favor, of two adults (who happen to be gay) getting married of which live in a free country that is not a theocracy with a Constitution that helps protect the rights of minorities from a majority’s rule. You would think that by me saying that same-sex marriage would be allowed but it is not. My friends explained to me the reasons why they believe it shouldn’t:
- Homosexuality is unnatural (meaning it is not found in nature and it is not normal or common)
- Same-sex marriage does not produce children
- Same-sex marriage destroys the sanctuary of marriage and it’s meaning
- Marriage has not been changed since the days of Adam and Eve
- Leviticus 20:13
Yet I disagree with them. Homosexual behavior is found in nature and it is quite common in a variety of groups of species.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_in_animals
The second point they make is that same-sex marriage does not produce children. Yet marriages between the elderly and couples who are sterile cannot produce children either. Should they not be allowed to get married either? They couldn't come up with an answer and told me they would ask their priest this Sunday.
Third point they both made was that same-sex marriage will destroy the sanctuary of marriage. It will ruin the original idea and plan of God for men and women to get married. But my point is – isn’t divorce what literally destroys the sanctuary of marriage? Why isn’t then divorce illegal and banned? It goes against the original plan of God for a holy union. It ends marriage.
Another point they made is that marriage has not been changed since the days of Adam and Eve. But actually, it has. The Loving v. Virginia case ruling in 1967 was a victory for civil rights that ended all racial-based legal restrictions on marriage in the United States. There were laws before, like the Racial Integrity Act of 1924 in Virginia, that forbid whites and non-whites to be legally married. Also, remember the old days when women were treated as property of men (Exodus 20:17)? That has changed too since. So marriage has been changed and for the better too.
Lastly, they mentioned, "If a man lies with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them." (Leviticus 20:13). Obviously, that will never happen because today we see how wrong it is to murder someone. But why is it still used as 'proof' that homosexuality is unnatural and wrong? Three verses before this is Leviticus 20:9 that states, "For everyone who curses his father or his mother shall surely be put to death. He has cursed his father or his mother. His blood shall be upon him." Should we kill our children then who make this mistake? I think not but why is the homosexual quote used and not this last one? Why take one literally and not the other? I don't understand really to be completely honest.
What is your opinion on same-sex marriage? Should gay people even be allowed equal treatment under the law under civil unions? If yes, have we learned anything from the idea of “separate but equal”? Opinions please.
R & C N, yes! That's what I meant. Word caught it and made the suggestion to change it when I misspelled it and I just kept writing it like that afterwards. Thanks.
Butterflygirl, I whole-heartedly respect your opinion and if I stand in your shoes I understand what you are trying to say. But please, I ask you the favor of standing in my shoes and see where I am coming from as well.
There is nothing wrong in questioning. There is nothing wrong in trying to see the world from different points of view.
An Atheist Republican? Allow me to tell you that you're the first person that I have ever met who is both an Atheist and a Republican. I'm sorry to say but I come from a very small, rather conservative city down here in Texas. The internet is the only place where I can find diversity in people.