Why is it that the government states gay people can't get married because it states it in the bible?

Question

Im not gay but it seems the goverment is lying to us.Well the government saids gays can't get married because it saids that in the bible.Well there are lots of laws that go aginst gods word in America.I think that majority of the goverment saids that is homafobic.Because homosexuality is a sin,then the goverment would be saying that being gay is aginst the law,hatetridge is aginst the law,judgeing is aginst the law,where does it end.I think that-that should be avoided.But gay marriage would be allowed if people voted for president KERRY.But most of us straights voted Bush.What is the world becomeing today?

Answer 1

Because we are trying to be a moral country. Read the Bible and discover for yourself.

Answer 2

First of all, the government has not said that gay people can't get married. Gay people have been getting married for several years.

What the government is currently doing is not actually banning gay marriage, but banning recognition of gay marriage by the states. It wants to make sure that no state will consider a homosexual union equal to straight marriage.

Some people choose religious reasons to back this banning of equal rights. Some choose biological reasons. No matter what reason a person gives, however, it results in simple discrimination.

None of the arguments really hold up constitutionally and what ever bans get passed in this time will eventually get overturned by the supreme court.

It is not constitutional for the government to decide one group of citizens is less than equal to another... thanx to the fourth amendment.

Answer 3

Marriage is a legally binding contract that stipulates one party is a man and the other is a woman. Gay couples can enter into civil unions. Many churches will also perform marriage ceremonies for gay couples. It just can't be legally recognized as a marriage by the United States Government.

It has nothing to do with the bible. Opponents of same-sex marriage bring up the bible, but it's not related.

What needs to happen is for legal marriage to be abolished on the basis that it's discriminatory. Civil unions can exist, and will take on additional rights and responsibilities that were reserved for marriage. In this way, legal marriage can be seperated from spiritual (or religious) marriage. And, we can all be equal.

Answer 4

Mankind was created male and female. The female body is designed to accept the male sex organ and humans are the only beings that have intercourse face to face. The mouth and anus are not meant to be substitute sex organs. This is why gay marriage is wrong. Two men or two women are not meant to be husband and husband or wife and wife. It goes against all that is natural and normal.

As for separation of church and state. It doesn't say that anywhere in the constitution. It came from a statement in a letter Jefferson wrote, taken out of context.

The founders of America did not want a government supported church like they had in England. That is what they were against. It was actually to provide for people to worship God as they desired and not be controlled by a state religion. But it was to be the ONE TRUE ALMIGHTEY CREATOR...NOT ALL THE FALSE gods we have allowed into this nation today.

That is one reason America is now under judgement. And it is only going to get worse unless there is repentance.

Answer 5

Marriage is and always will be a solely religious act. The fact that people can go to a judge and get married doesn't change this fact. The only reason the gay community wants to marry is for the financial and insurance benefits. These they could just go to a lawyer and have designated in writing. I'm sorry if I have offended anyone, but you did ask for an opinion.

Answer 6

sitting 13000 klms away and watching America come to terms with the fact that they elected a President who is a hypocrite. Because one of the laws of the bible state "Thou shalt not KILL".
Bush is a red neck fundamentalist, not too much brain power and now cemented and focused the worlds attention to all of America's double talk. It is also law that the church doesn't have the right to dictate government policies, but it still happens. It is also a fact that the church is guilty of mass child molestation, and still the government takes no action, so until the people of America and in my country elect a person into power on merit rather than the ability to be able to purchase the election, then there is going to be a long fight ahead, just like the fights and protests of the ***** communities of the sixty's and seventy's and still this fight continues

Answer 7

Your government is promoting immorality by telling you that it's right to tell consenting adults who they can and cannot marry. Clearly it's wrong to discriminate against gay people in this way. Moreover, it's grossly immoral to make decisions such as this on the basis of unsupported claims - e.g. to claim that a deity exists, and what his opinion is on the matter, and thus decide what people will or will not be allowed to do, without even being able to demonstrate the *existence* of such a deity, far less what his opinion is on any matter at all.

All this is yet more evidence, if any were needed, that we cannot have a decent civilised society unless religion is kept out of civil affairs.

Answer 8

gay marriage are forbidden for as you said, the bible. Actually, it's not that stupid when it comes to respect religion. But as you said, since lots of things go against the religion like those who are philosopher... they shoudn't exist... well sex shouldn't exist... but humans don't respect that so I don't understand why gay marriage could hurt.
But I think, the government thinks that it is wiser for the children. Children "should be" loved by a man and a woman. I totally disagree about that but since it's said can't do much about it.
But I think the only problem comes from the religion...if people were less believing in God, I think gay marriage'd be possible. Until then, can't do much about it.

Answer 9

Being Gay is condemed in the bible, however, Pope Paul II talked about the rights of GLBT people. In the States, they should consider a country of freedom, like Canada, who is the 3rd country in the world that legally accept GLBT marriage Equally as in a hetero marriage. Here they even have a PRIDE month and parades and all kinds of art and recreational events for everyone and supporting GLBT rights. is so nice to see couples in the street holding hands, kissing, having families and loving who they are and feeeling free to live without prejudices, discrimination, violation of human rights, etc. Isn't LOVE a free and very personal part of a Human Being... God is Love and i see it this way... I don't think God likes Terrorists, discrimination, hatetridge, murders, etc. if LOVING A WOMAN makes me sin, then what should i do? HATE instead of loving? Come on!! honestly take the example of Canada i admire how much change has canada adopted and how much support they give GLBT people. I'm christian, Catholic and i don't believe GOD will let me go to hell because i love a woman, because i want ot have a family, because i could hold hands and kiss in public...

That's so not 21rst century... Even church will have to support GLBT in a future, cause that is not PERVERTION, OR A SICKNESS OR A DISORDER, is cientifically proven that is part of a Human Being.... his or he Sexuality... Whether Gay or not... is a PERSON... and has trhe right to LOVE who he or she wants...

I think there's just political interest behing the Not accepting GLBT marriage and of course tolerating it... cuase most of people are Homophobic, so government has to do what MOST of their voters want them to do...

Thank you

Answer 10

Wow this is quite a post, let's answer a few bits.

It is quite unlikely that most people in general voted for Mr. Bush -- but that would require a great deal of explanation, we are hopefully cleaning up our voting process prior to `08.

In any event, 35% of the gay community voted for Bush according to exit polls, and Log Cabin (gay) Republicans give a great deal of money to the Republican party -- so don't presume that the gay community is clearly divided. It should be, but it isn't.

Regarding gay marriage, you are correct that it is a religious issue -- but what you miss (because the mainstream press misses it, so why would you notice it) is that the ENTIRE debate is religious -- both sides.

The real question is not whether or not churches that oppose gay marriage would be forced to perform them, that would never happen. The question is not one that is secular versus religious either. It is a matter of using government and secular authorities for one group of religions (Christian and non) to establish their beliefs and deny the beliefs of another group of religions (Christian and non).

Let me repeat myself, no one thinks that the Assembly of God and the Southern Baptist churches, nor the Ultra Orthodox Jews, nor the Fundamentalist Moslems should be or would be forced to marry gay couples. However, why should the United Church of Christ, the Unitarian Universalists, the Reform Jews, and the Correllian Natavist Tradition of Wicca be denied the right to practice faith as they see it, which includes gay marriage? Isn't America a country with freedom of religion? Doesn't America practice anti-establishmentarianism? Didn't our ancestors die in the Revolution to guarantee such? (In my case Colonel Ebenezer Reynolds)

This has concerned me for years. I am Episcopalian. My parish, either the largest or second largest in my diocese strongly supports gay marriage. Why should my pastor be denied the right to perform something he, and we the congregates, believe in -- to satisfy people from other faiths. Now not all Episcopalians support gay marriage, but many do, a vast majority of those I know.

Which brings me to the final point I want to make. You refer to the Bible as the word of god. It isn't. While I can recommend a good book titled "Misquoting Jesus" by Dr. Bart Ehrman, published by Harper Collins if you want a birdseye view of what we know, I can also give you a simpler, and somewhat less devout view of it myself.

While we have none of the autographs of the Bible, the early manuscripts we do have have and that are known to be genuine, by the most conservative estimates, have 200,000 differences between the wording in them, and while many are not meaningful, some completely change the doctrine of the church. (Ehrman, Bart, Ph.D.; Misquoting Jesus: The story behind who changed the Bible and Why; Harper Collins, 2006 -- p. 89). less conservative estimates range up to about 400,000 -- and there are programmers now endeavoring to write a program that will be able to count the exact number of variances.

And that's only the start of the difficulties for the Bible. If you only use the Textus Receptus (Received Text) as it is printed in modern Bibles then you are looking at enormous problems anyway -- in fact insurmountable ones. The World does not have corners (Isaiah 11:12), nor does it sit on pillars (I Samuel 2:8), nor water (Psalms 24:1-2). God did not establish a solid dome over the earth (that's what firmament literally means) and he does not have a palace on top of it from which angels can come and go up Jacob's ladder -- which might be reached by the tower of babel -- and where he keeps "treasuries" of hail and snow (Job 38: 22-23). For the sake of all that is decent, you can't even harmonize the 1st and 2nd chapters of Genesis with each other, say nothing of being able to defend the Biblical creation as scientifically factual. That's no surprise though, as the Bible tells us that beetles have four legs (Leviticus 11: 21-23) and that rabbits chew their cuds (Deuteronomy 14:7). It says that pi is 3, not 3.14 (I Kings 7:23 and 2 Chronicles 4:2) and that the mustard seed is the smallest seed in the world and grows into a tree [neither of which are true] (Matthew 13: 31-32). It is hardly a font of rational thought or scientific accuracy. Furthermore these errors only scratch the surface. Try harmonizing accounts in Joshua and the telling of the same tales in timeline in Judges sometime. If you can you are more proficient than any theologian I've ever met, and I've met a few.

Late bronze age men created the OT and early iron age ones the NT. It is not surprising therefore that God cannot lead Israel to defeat Iron chariots after promising he would (Judges 1:19), and it is not surprising that the flight of Israel from the god Chemosh, after the king of a city the Jews were beseiging and that God had promised them they would overthrow The King of the city offered his own son to Chemosh as a human sacrifice, resulting in Chemosh driving the Israelites away (2 Kings 3: 19-27) -- further it is not surprising that no punishment is mentioned -- the Israelites were still sacrificing their own children, as is evidenced in several places, but most graphically in Judges 11:30-39

The long and short of it is, the Bible is a mythic book, written by bronze and iron age men who were recording primarily oral legends in written form. In any realistic sense it is drivel. You can see, just in the passages I noted above from 2 Kings -- the last vestiges of polytheism fading away. Chemosh was supposed to get power from human sacrifice, just as Jehovah did -- and that power allowed him to turn the table against Israel, despite the fact that God was with Israel.

Read the verses, read the context -- to all the things I've suggested, calm your breathing and thinking and ask yourself if this is really the God of the Universe you are reading about -- or a tribal deity, which has now evolved into the one we worship. I think you will find biblegod sadly lacking -- something the liturgical churches have been saying for hundreds of years. If you find yourself unwilling to even look -- ask yourself why? Are you willing to sacrifice the truth, in order to maintain a comfortable myth for yourself?

And if you want a chuckle, read the second, and theoretically final version of the ten commandments. They are in Exodus 34: 10-26. That is the covenant Yahweh actually made with Israel. No seething here.

Have a nice day.

Regards,

Reynolds Jones
http://www.rebuff.org
believeinyou24

Answer 11

For the record, Kerry was AGAINST same-sex marriage, although he did favor domestic partnership.

Also, quite a few gay people voted for Bush, believe it or not. His fearmongering & lies re: "terrorism" & the Iraq War led a lot of folks to vote according to this single issue.

What's interesting, though, is how little interest Bush shows in the same-sex marriage debate until he starts losing support among his religious rightwing base. That's when he decides to play the anti-same-sex-marriage card as a wedge issue to placate his conservative backers.