OK, So what if I'm willing to concede that gay marriage is 'wrong'?

Many Christians believe that gay marriage is 'wrong', and therefore should not be legal. But let's take a look at things that are legal:

Consumption of alcohol, even to excess.

Sex before marriage (in most places)

The income tax (or the legalized theft of what I earn)

Insulting other people.

Skipping church/not keeping the Sabbath holy.

Jealousy, coveting the neighbor's donkey (or butt)

Watching/reading things that are not "good or holy"

If you can live with these things being legal, but choose not to do them yourself, can you please explain the difference between that, and gay marriage sanctioned by the state? I'm not suggesting that a church or religion or individual change their views. I am only suggesting that if you don't want to marry someone of the same sex, don't. But allow those who believe differently to live with the same rights you have. You have the RIGHT to do some things you COOSE not to do. So do they.



Please do not tell me how homosexuality is an 'abomination'. I understand that may be what you believe, but most who believe that also believe that it is wrong to drink too much, or to worship some other god. Both are still legal, and nobody is suggesting we change it (since prohibition, anyway)

Update 2:

This is already too long, but I have to respond to Cheir: Aren't you doing just that when you discriminate within the law based on your religious beliefs? I truly do not understand the logic of your argument.

Update 3:

I'm finding it interesting that not one fundie has argued with me. Not one person has argued anything other than "because god says it's wrong", which I conceded to in the original question. Have a finally made a point?

Update 4:

"I"... have "I" finally made a point.

16 Answers

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    "homosexual" wasn't a word till 1869 so it can't be a sin "The Greek text of the NT does NOT use the specific word homosexual. If you have a Bible that uses the specific word "homosexual," then you need to throw it out and get a new Bible, the translators have taken gross liberties. The word being translated to "homosexual" in 1 Corithians 6, and 1 Timothy 1 is "arsenokoitai." This word does not appear in Greek writings prior to Paul's use of it in the NT. PAUL MADE THE WORD UP!!!!! Nobody knows for sure what meaning Paul was trying to convey by it's use. If the meaning Paul wanted to convey was homosexual, then he would have used the word "paiderasste", which was the term used at the time for male homosexual. The word "paiderasste" does not appear in the Bible. "Arsenokoitai" is made up of two parts: "arsen" means "man"; "koitai" means "beds." Literally translated "arsenokoitai" is a "male-bedder." It is interesting to note that during the time of Martin Luther, the word was universally translated as masturbators untill the 20th century. Male-bedder has also been interpreted to mean a male prostitute. Which seems to me would be much closer to it's meaning than homosexual. The Greek word being translated as effeminate is "malakoi." The word appears two other times in the NT, both times being translated as "soft." Taken in the context of this passage some believe it to actually mean "soft in morals." Within it's context, that meaning makes more sense than it does as a descriptive of a person's outward mannerisms. Jesus, himself, never says one word against homosexuality. If it is the grave sin it is made out to be, then you would think that Jesus would have mentioned it. In fact, Jesus may have confirmed that homosexuals are from birth in Matthew 19:11. The modern meaning of the word eunuch is a castrated male. However, in ancient times it was a broad term that included any man who lacked sexual desire for women for whatever reason. Hence, their use as chamberlains or officers in the Bible. It should be noted that men who are castrated after puberty do not lose their sex drive, and historically have made untrustworthy chamberlains. In fact, many women of the harem preferred having sex with castrated males because they could not get pregnant by them. Jesus even states that not everyone can accept this word. If eunuch simply meant a castrated male or a person born with deformed genitals, then why would some not be able to accept this word? If the ancient term "eunuch" did indeed include homosexuals (some surviving ancient Roman literature points to this), then Jesus was proven right, some cannot accept that homosexuality is normal and natural from birth. BTW: Sodom and Gomorrah were not destroyed because of homosexuality. The decision to destroy the city of Sodom was made prior to the incident with the angels. Ezekeiel 16:49-50 tells us exactly why the city of Sodom was destroyed: "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen." There is no mention of homosexuality. In Matthew 10:14-15 & Luke 10:7-16, Jesus implies that the sin of the people of Sodom was inhospitality to strangers. Jude 1:7 talks about the sin of Sodom as "going after strange flesh." That would seem to me to be talking about bestiality, the angels were not human. Would angels even be confined to definitions of male or female sexual characteristics? The other problem with saying that this story is about homosexuality is that Lot offers his two daughters to the mob. Lot lived in Sodom and would have certainly known if the men in the mob were homosexual. Why would he even offer his two daughters to a mob of homosexuals? If the mob's intentions were homosexual in nature, then why didn't Lot offer the mob his two future son-in-laws? Romans 1:26-27 is not speaking about people with a homosexual orientation. It is speaking specifically about heterosexual men and women who go against their own sexual orientation. The key word here is "exchanges." That implies that the men and women being talked about had known something different previously. They had previously known the truth about God, then exchanged him for what they knew to be a lie, (what went against their own nature.) They had previously been heterosexual, and again exchanged it for what goes against their own nature"

    Miss A has produced a bigots predictable response by falsely linking gays to murderers and pedophiles, why do bigoted christians never understand consent?

  • 4 years ago

    First the word is discrimination. All laws are restrictions on personal freedoms that are theoretically put in place for the benefit of society. There are no laws against "gay" marriage". There are laws against a man marrying a man or a woman marrying a women. That law applies to gays and straights, young and old, of all ethnic origins. Now you say why would a man marry a man unless he was gay. There could be many reasons. For financial gain, insurance, citizenship, polygamy, bisexual, transexual, transgender. I don't think these restrictions pass the same test as other types of dicrimination

  • 1 decade ago

    The State has no right to sanction any marriage between two individuals. The State's duty is to adjudicate the proper disposition of property in the event of death or incapacitation of one or both of the partners named in the contract.

    I don't know anybody who is still married because the State "sanctioned" their marriage. People who remain married do so because they love each other, work through the toil and trouble, and often consider their marriage to be a matter between them and their god.

    In other words, I couldn't care less about the issue. It's merely a legal arrangement, like filing a living trust.

    The God thing happens on the religious side, and that's none of the State's business whatsoever. Sanctioned and sanctify are from the same root word, and it's religious, not a legal construct.

  • 1 decade ago

    I guess most people have forgotten that gays were created by God before humans and if you look at the arguement from the most fundamental perspective, those who restrict the rights of others (under both God and country) out of sheer ignorance are even bigger abominations themselves. Don't worry though, they will have plenty of time to come to their realization when they finally do go to this Hell they believe in. After all Love and Understanding is supposed to be the way of the God they believe in and, not Ignorance, Arrogance, Intollerance or Hate.

    Miss A - You are actually comparing gays to mass murderers? Wow! Did you actually catch the last line I wrote earlier?

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 1 decade ago

    All I know is that there are a lot of happy, loving people who have had their life-long wish fulfilled. Why would ANYONE want to take that happiness away from ANYONE!

    I don't hassle atheists and I don't hassle Xians.

    The local Jewish synagogue has agreed that gay marriage is OK with the Jewish religion so what's the big deal?

    The local Xian church is doing gay weddings too.

    I think the Catholics are still holding out but the Pope keeps telling them that He'll ex-communicate them if they even think of it. The Pope and Bush are in cahoots.

    I mean if the divorce rate was 5% and gay marriage threatened to make it 50% I could understand but the rate is 50% and maybe gay marriage will help lower that.

    Personally I don't believe that the Chinese should be given driver's licenses but I don't SPEAK that in public and I don't advocate it anywhere and I would never vote to deny them their rights to drive. I just give them a lot of room when I see them on the highway.

    There are a lot of things that bother me but I just turn away and don't make it my business since it really ISN'T my business.

    When I go to the local Farmer's Market I may not agree with some of the pork products that are sold but I don't buy them and if someone else gets sick from it then "OH WELL". If some porno movie is showing I have the option of avoiding it. If two people are having sex in the park I just walk the other way.

    I guess what I'm saying is just b/c something is happening on this planet does NOT mean that it is being done out of spite for ME or my religion, or lack thereof, or for any other reason than THOSE PEOPLE WANT or LIKE to do what they are doing and they never asked my permission but so what? I don';t run the planet and NO ONE has to get permission from me to do anything!

    Do Xians have to check with me before they go to Church? NO! Do I have to ask them if I want to get married to someone of the same sex? NO! Do they mind if I have pizza for dinner? WHO CARES!!!?

    Someone referred to the Xians as being the same as the Borg. I like to think they are NOT! But this gay marriage thing makes me wonder! I have a VERY outspoken str8 minister friend who is married, has two kids, and is VERY out-spoken but he does not feel that gay-marriage has anything to do with him. If his SONS wanted to have a gay marriage I'm sure that would be DIFFERENT! But they are HIS kids! And he can at least offer his opinion to them. They still don't have to accept it. But when complete strangers tell other complete strangers to do as THEY Wish aren't we going over the edge just a tad? I think so.

    Let's just ALL be adult and accept that not EVERYTHING is going to be as we wish. I don't agree with those who sacrifice babies and drink their blood but THAT Would be WAY more important to me than gay marriage. (If you don't think that actually happens just check out the Bohemian Grove). And why aren't the Xians all up in arms about that by the way? Do they agree with it? Then why aren't they protesting it? Would they attract the wrath of the ruling elite and possibly be murdered for their intercession? Of COURSE THEY WOULD! Would we do that to the Xians? Of course we would .... not!

    Ease up everyone! Let the world find happiness but INSIST that they NOT break the ONE MOST IMPORTANT RULE ... AND THAT IS .... HARM NO ONE!


    Peace y'all ... Harm No One!

    Source(s): http:// 2012 . heavenforum .com will set you free. Remove the spaces and place in your browser!
  • Abriel
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    You know what, I find this retort to be right up there with reminding them that according to the same book they claim says homosexuality is an abomination, so is eating shellfish and going out in public when you're on your period. Good job!

    And Miss A....comparing homosexuals to pedophiles and mass murderers? Wow. Just wow. Very typical bigoted response.

  • Dan
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    "Many Christians believe that gay marriage is 'wrong', "

    OK!!! Stop there. The trouble happens when they want to legislate their hate on everyone else. They get to hate everyone they want to including themselves. however, if they had it their way, blacks and whites still would not be allowed to marry. and NO ONE would be able to marry an Irish blooded person, a Cherokee, or someone with downs syndrome.

    Keep christians out of government. Stop the hate.

  • 1 decade ago

    True. Unfortunately many religious people (not just christians, but jews and muslims) are hypocrites and wish to force their views on everybody else - that's a bad path, as history has shown time and time again.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    You know you've asked a good question when the number of stars you get exceeds the number of answers you get by a margin of 3:1.

  • 1 decade ago

    Link to my similar question:


    As you can see, people will believe whatever they're going to believe. I don't think any argument, no matter how well formulated, can change anybody's mind if he's not already prepared to receive it.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.