Many Christians will claim that gay marriage is opposed by their clergy and that legalizing it will go against their religion.
Here’s the problem: We already have branches of Christianity that marry gay couples, so how does that argument hold up?
Because they are ignorant bigots. My marriage doesn’t violate their Freedom of Religion any more than their steak dinner violates my vegetarianism.
Simply put, it doesn’t. It’s christians trying to force their idea of morality on others. What makes marriage sacred is the love and bond the two people have and share.
Some say marriage is all about reproduction. In todays world, there are way to many people on this planet. Having a bunch of people not reproducing is not an issue,
Some people should not have kids and we all know it. Some people just should not reproduce. Also, some people aren’t meant to have kids, take that however you want. If it’s “God’s will” or natures.
You ask two separate questions. I’ve learned to avoid this debate because it goes nowhere, but I think I can answer without offending you.
First, these folks’ understanding of Christianity defines marriage specifically as the union of man and woman. Even today this is by far the majority view. It’s the only view held for the first 1900+ years of the religion. Marriage is the primary metaphor used in the Christian scriptures to describe the relationship between Christ and the Church. It’s not peripheral. For Christians marriage has profound theological significance. That’s why they oppose redefining it to include same sex couples.
There is a deeper issue here than that, one which speaks directly to your question. By legalizing same sex marriage the state is taking the official position that Christianity is not true. The government is telling millions and millions of its citizens that their most deeply held moral convictions not only don’t matter, they are wrong. I don’t find it surprising that these people see this as an assault on their freedom to practice their faith.
Your second question is about division among Christians about this. This isn’t really to the point because Christianity is a voluntary religion. In other words, most anybody can decide to call themselves Christian and there isn’t any official way to police that. The result is pretty chaotic as this issue makes clear. But for people on either side the fact that others who call themselves Christian disagree doesn’t carry much weight. I’m sure you’ve heard members of both groups calling the others unchristian. I don’t like that, but the alternative (some sort of rigid authoritarian hierarchy) has shown itself to be even worse.
Freedom of religion means speaking the Truth of that religion even when it is unpopular.
For the example above: No Churchman in any of the Traditional Christian faiths will marry a homosexual couple – that is not the issue.
However if this same Churchman speaks out against homosexuality as a sin (Note: In this example without pointing fingers at any particular individual/s) and is suddenly sued for “Hate Speech” – wouldn’t that limit our ability to teach the truths of the Bible and our faith?
To put this idea in perspective:
In England some very controversial laws have been passed called “Anti-Blasphemy Laws”. The end result of this being, that if anyone even SPEAKS (e.g. a conversation) against Islam then they are guilty of hate speech and can face fines or jail.
The idea of political correctness has taken the place of reason in Western society. We have forgotten that we can “agree to disagree” and still get along. People are so afraid of “offending” someone else, that they circumscribe themselves into smaller and smaller boxes – as if there were something wrong with their opinions or beliefs. Taking away their voices, unless they are repeating what is said by everyone – and venturing into independent thought with great peril.
My thought is this “we are BETTER than this!”:
If an atheist is “offended” at the 10 Commandments displayed on a public building … just don’t look. “Cowboy up!” No one is physically assaulting you, verbally abusing you, saying things that are not true … instead of suing, “Man up!”
Homosexual relationships are against nature; however, homosexuality is an inherent characteristic of a society to slow population growth once a society becomes large enough that this demographic makes up a significant percentage of the the population. In general, homosexuals do not procreate. Procreation is important to the viability of a society. Religions encourage procreation and morality. If a society does not produce enough children then that whole society will just die off through attrition.
The reasoning behind gay marriage has nothing to do with love. MARRIAGE is fundamentally a religious commitment to PROCREATION and the welfare of offspring. With the increase in feminism and the feminization of boys and men in our society the term marriage has become a politically correct term meaning: a financial commitment between two adults until it’s no longer attractive to be in that commitment.
The financial benefits and ramifications penetrate deep into our society. Here is a PARTIAL list of reasons why homosexual marriage is anti-social and does not productively contribute to the survival of a society.
– married couples pay a lower tax rate per person than a single person (and that tax break is to encourage the nuclear family and procreation)
– survivor benefits (life insurance, estates, social security, retirement benefits, etc.)
– combination of benefits under health insurance plans,
– decreases the out of pocket cost for medical care and cost of medications (HIV and AIDS),
– sharing of protected medical information
3. ADOPTION (which is the new social intellectual buzz word)
– increases the chances of being able to adopt
– further degrades society by introducing the NEW nuclear family
– attack against moral and religious beliefs of our society
– promotes promiscuity and sexual anarchy
– divorce rights (this is a big reason why gays want to marry)
– marriage is a religious union recognized by the government (RELIGIONS that do not condone homosexuality)
– gives credibility to lifestyle choice
– PSUEDO-human rights affiliation for support (this movement is not the same as equal rights struggle in the 60’s)
– creates a growing and strong political base
– legitimacy to not be discriminated against (certain federal jobs restrict employment to homosexuals)
– repeal of don’t ask don’t tell, being accepted in military is a federal job with FEDERAL BENEFITS
– passing of laws to spread and protect their way of life (i.e. mandating homosexual behavior be taught in grade schools)
I can keep going on, but the bottom line is gay marriage has NOTHING to do with love. You can love someone without being married. These people do not procreate. So what is the point in them getting married?
If gay marriage is about love then why can’t this so-called “non-religious ceremony” be called a civil union?
It’s something that I’ve always considered, and so would have to answer with the following: I totally agree with you. Marriages do not have to be performed by clergy. Hope that answer is ok. Now my brain hurts & I need to take a chill pill!
Then they shouldn’t marry Gays or allow them into the religious facilities. Problem fixed. We are not asking them to go against what they believe. Marriage is not a religious institution. It’s a civil one. If they don’t believe in Gay marriage, it’s quite legal for them not to marry gays.
Our laws should not be based on Religious laws. Not everybody is the same religion.
The branches of “Christianity” the perform such ceremonies overlook the facts that homosexuality is called a sin in Scripture, and that even Jesus Himself defined marriage as between man and woman.
Such branches of “Christianity” would rightly be called heretical, and not Christian by the earliest of founders of the faith.
You can disagree with me about homosexual marriage if you so desire, but the argument I present is valid from, say, an Eastern Orthodox or Coptic Christian point of view.
A church will never be forced to marry a gay couple. If a gay couple wants to get married, they just go to a gay-friendly church or justic of the peace. No problem.
A gay marriage poses no threat whatsoever to anyone else.
Gay activism does-like trying to tell a christian business owner that he has to take pictures of gays kissing if he owns a photo shop. Its against his values.