Why does everyone have a problem with Gay Marriage?

Question

I mean come one people! How closed minded can you be?
I am not gay.I am a straight,christian male.I know every one says Jesus says not to be gay.But has any one looked at the fact that He said also not to judge people?

im sorry, did not mean EVERYONE
I mean the Moronic Republican Christians that i talk to all the time,
by the way Hells queen I disagree.If youre saying that im sinning then you and i are both damned because Jesus said NOT TO JUDGE, DOnt worry hellsqueen God does'nt need another Bible spreader. If i want to read it i will, but dont cram it down my or anybody else throats.

one more thing.

I would like to say sorry to everyone that is mad at me for saying "everyone is against gay marriage" I spoke out of generalzation. Everyone i spoke two at school except for a few said tat Homosexuals were gross, and weird, and just plain sick.
I have a gay uncle by blood.He lives in texas. Im sure that will make people mad....

Answer 1

First, I must once again I must couch an objection to the term "gay marriage" because gay people aren't looking for a new form of marriage... they're trying to join everyone else in marrying the person they love.

Second, I think the series of answers saying "hey! I don't object!" probably establishes that not everyone has a problem, and I'm glad they don't.

However, as far as those who have a problem with the notion, I have read the Bible quite thoroughly, and yes, I must admit most of those who object to the concept of "gay marriage" do so because of what is written in its pages.

The thing about it, though, is that if you pay real attention to modern Christian doctrine, very little of it comes from the words of Jesus, at least in America. It would probably inconvenience the lives of Christians far too much to have to admit Jesus forbids them most of their judgmental actions (along with quite a few other things like keeping excess wealth, publicly donating to charity and being recognized for it, eating non-kosher foods, divorcing and re-marrying, etc).

For the moment, Christianity largely seems to have become a movement for those who don't want to be righteous so much as they want to be self-righteous, which always comes with a core of egotistical judgmentalism. It isn't enough for most people to be faithful, they have to find a way to scorn those who don't share their faith, and it often manifests in movements like this, to forbid other people rights they feel entitled to themselves on the basis of the fact they don't like the minority choice.

I would object to that notion, and so would the Founding Fathers, on many grounds, though they are often pointed to as supporting the idea of America as a "Christian Nation". To that, I would have to quote Dave Chappelle:

"Hmmm... let's see... 'We hold these truths to be self-evident that all men are created equal, and are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights, among those being life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'... that's a good start. Get over here n*gger! Bring me my dinner or I'll kill you!!!"

So, the Founding Fathers may not have been the flawless thinkers on the subject of human rights or protecting the minority we'd like to think they are.

On the other hand, though, I would also have to quote the man who actually WROTE our Constitution, James Madison:

"I must admit moreover that it may not be easy, in every possible case, to trace the line of separation between the rights of religion and the civil authority with such distinctness as to avoid collisions and doubts on unessential points. The tendency to a usurpation on one side or the other or to a corrupting coalition or alliance between them will be best guarded against by entire abstinence of the government from interference in any way whatever, beyond the necessity of preserving public order and protecting each sect against trespasses on its legal rights by others."

And:

"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution."

Or, to put it another way:

"There is no maxim, in my opinion, which is more liable to be misapplied, and which, therefore, more needs elucidation, than the current one, that the interest of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong"

There may be conflicting quotes by other Founding Fathers, but honestly I think when it comes to considering the American Constitution, what James Madison had to say about the matter probably carries more weight than just about anything else since it was his mind and imagination which became the American dream... so he could best tell you the intimacies of what those ideas and principles meant, and he vehemently rejected the notions of allowing religious belief to govern social policy or allowing majority desire subjugate minority welfare.

However, just for those who need it, how about a George Washington quote?

"The government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion."

Just because someone is "conservative" and "traditional" in their values does not mean they have a superior insight into what this country was intended to be than those with a liberal vent. The Founding Fathers of America weren't just liberal for their time, they were revolutionaries, and the ideas that change should not come because we are used to doing things another way, or the notion that the majority should always get what it wants simply because it can muster up a mob large enough to take anything it cares to from the minority, stand in stark opposition to the very core values and dreams our Founding Fathers, and all the Americans at its founding, fought and died to make America out of.

Before I end, I also have to note just how silly the whole "sex is for procreation, marriage is for family, children should be raised by a man and a woman" argument is.

First off, even though there are six and a half billion people on the planet, human beings are ASTOUNDINGLY bad at procreating. How many children do most women have? One or two, maybe three? If you hit five, how many people are dumbfounded by the number?

How many times do people have sex? Did they only have it the five times or so? Even if they had to spend a few months trying, a couple only has a span of about three or four days out of each month where the woman is fertile and can become pregnant, so you're talking about a handful of attempts, out of literally hundreds and thousands of sexual encounters, which led to procreation and the production of offspring. That's a TERRIBLE batting average.

Trust me, I used to breed dogs. They knock it out of the park gangbusters style when it comes to making babies. They know when to do it, they know how to do it, and it pretty much always leads not only to one baby, but a whole gaggle of them. Great breeders, dogs. Cats, too. They seem to get the job done wonderfully and produce dozens of offspring per parent.

Humans, not so much.

Sex for us seems to be meant primarily for things other than reproduction, and those who bang on about its procreative powers know it because they don't have several hundred children themselves... but I guarantee you most of them keep having sex long after they're done procreating, and they keep doing it (they will be quick to admit while turning around and denying this is the purpose of the act for anyone else), because it's an expression of love and affection for their mate and gives them time to bond with one another.

They don't seem to hold their own blatantly non-procreative sexual activity in contempt, or see it as decadent or onanistic.

They also don't seem to have problems with all those heterosexual couples who, either through choice or through no fault of their own, spend their entire marriages and lives child-less, having never produced a single offspring no matter how many times they had sex.

Likewise, there are many people out there who, either through choice or no fault of their own, are raising children on their own as a mother or father without the other parent present, and none of these advocates of the "traditional nuclear family" seem to be trying to pass laws to prevent that sort of situation, either, because both requisite sexes aren't present in the household.

By the "sex is for procreation, marriage is for family, all children should be raised by a man and a woman" argument, not only should gay people not be allowed to marry, but straight people should not be allowed to have sex, even within marriage, for any other reason than producing a child, single parents should immediately have their children taken away from them, and heterosexual couples who don't or can't have children should immediately have their marriage dissolved on those grounds.

It is a foolish argument in the extreme, Draconian in realistic application and downright hypocritical in the way people try to apply it only to those they don't seem to want to like or feel any sympathy toward, and ultimately revealed as utter nonsense in all the ways every other type of relationship can be justified in spite of those objections except for the homosexual relationships most people simply don't find appealing to their personal tastes.

As for the rest of it, I will simply note that it has always been the default position of the American people, despite our claim to be "the land of the free", that when starting to consider rights for others, to begin with the assumption they deserve nothing and making them fight to receive their basic human rights rather than assume all people are created equal and grant them the same rights until it can be shown why they should be taken away.

Riothamus also gives a very well-considered answer about the history of the thing, so I will simply refer to his answer for those notions, rather than try to restate what he has already said so well.

Answer 2

Some people are homophobic, some people are Christians. The homophobes are just that. Prejudiced people who can't stop turning their heads away from two guys kissing to take the time to understand that gayness isn't a disease. Christians, and not all of them, believe in their God and believe that everything other than praying, breathing, eating, having sex with your life spouse, and sleeping is a sin and that you'll burn in hell for getting a sex change, screwing someone of the same sex, kissing someone of the same sex, listening to heavy metal, sneezing, and basically not living your life in a box. That's why 'most' people have a problem with gay marriage. The other part that don't are very liberal or another religion. From the middle east.

Answer 3

Actually, Christ did not speak about homosexuality. The "basis" for anti-gay discrimination in Christianity comes from the Old Testament, especially Leviticus. The most aggravating facet of this prejudice is that Leviticus say that you must "keep all of the law or keep none of it." Leviticus also lists laws such as women not being allowed to speak unless spoken to by a man, or not wearing wool and cotton together.
The most telling part of this prejudice is that in the past, the Bible has been used to justify slavery and misogyny.
I think that gays are one of the last minorities that it is okay to hate
and discriminate against.

Answer 4

I do *not* advocate judging anyone, and I actively oppose anyone who would persecute gays.

The Bible does speak of homosexuality as wrong, but it also speaks, much more strongly, of forgiveness, and of withholding judgment of others. It speaks of punishment for sins, but *every* Christian who rants against gays commits sins the Bible promises to punish just as certainly. Since the Bible is overall about forgiveness, I think this is the most important point Christians need to remember. To those who quote the Bible against gays - what do they say about the part where it says "Judge not, lest you be judged"? Clearly, God has far more of a problem with hatred than with homosexuality.

(As an aside, "hell's queen" may pretend to speak for Christians, but at least she is partly honest. Hatred *is* from hell. Of course, I don't recall any part of the Bible where God appointed hell's queen His spokesperson. It would seem kind of odd if he had.)

But there are reasons why gay marriage seems like a bad idea to so many people, and whatever you think of those reasons, it is important to at least *understand* them. One reason is that there is so little historical precedent.

In history, there have been gays, and openly gay couples. However, such couples never married. Marriage was not always between two people; some cultures allowed men to have more than one wife, and I believe there were at least one or two little known cultures that allowed women to have more than one husband. But, marriage was always between opposite sexes.

I am only aware of one exception to this: Roman accounts state that the Emperor Nero publicly married another man, and publicly consummated that marriage. Now, Nero is not a good precedent - this is the man who also slept with his mother, later murdered her, and who arranged for arsonists to destroy much of Rome so he could expand his palace. So saying he was an exception won't really do much to change people's minds.

People are often afraid of new things, and there are reasons for such fear. When you try something new, it might work out or it might cause problems no one has thought of. So, the fact that this has never been done before makes people nervous. I am not saying people who want to do so should be stopped; I am just pointing out some of the reasons many people feel as they do.

When you add to that the hate-mongers, who intentionally exploit that fear, it is not hard to understand why there is so much opposition to gay marriage. These bigots invent all kinds of false reasons, and manipulate people so they will listen to those reasons. As long as there are bigots and politicians to exploit the nervousness many people feel, there will be opposition.

Personally, I believe each church should be able to set their own policy on the type(s) of marriage they accept. To do otherwise would infringe on people's freedom of religion, and I doubt most gays would want to go to a church where everyone believed they were evil, anyway. *Civil* marriage should be available to anyone, however. The Taliban tried imposing their religion on everyone - we know how *that* worked.

Answer 5

It is because of the word marriage. Marriage is historically a church ceremony. I am against gay marriage. BUT, I do think there should be a legal right for gay unions. People have a right to live as they choose. I'm straight, but have no problem with what a person does in the privacy of their bedroom.

Answer 6

because it would be a bad thing to let that type of ppl marry. the purpose of marriage is fro two ppl-MAN & WOMAN-to have children inthe home wiith two loving parents of both sexes. They complement each other in the raisiong of the children. That segment of society-homos-that wants to marry are just plain sick. God created a man & woman(not 2 men or 2 females) and placed them in the garden of eden. Even the bible is against homosexuality.

Answer 7

It's not everyone who has a problem with gay marriage, just those who think that marriage should not be strayed from the original definition of man and woman. Most of those who disagree with Gay Marriage are those who also believe that if you're gay you have aids, and most of the time they're men, who think that thay have to walk backwards out of a room with a gay man in it. The problem is that the majority of our society hates changes, and things aren't going to get any better, or move any farther if we don't accept change. I personally think that we are far behind, we are under-developed, and things could be better if we just accept that change is inevitable.

Answer 8

i am not against it at all i think it is a good thing about time gays get some rights i think it is awful the way they have been treated and i think they should be able to adopt
people get me down as well when they go on about gays
i have many gay friends and would never give them up because some idiot says
it is wrong to be gay leave them stupid small brain people were they are Hun they are not worth your time worrying
respect
shaz

Answer 9

Do gay couples need to marry? even heterosexuals are not marrying nowadays. Why bother to marry, just live together and be faithful to your partner. What if it is legalized and other non gay people take advantage of the system? Gays are minority so better leave the marraige issue to the majorities. Be happy yourself and do your own special ceremonies personally.

Answer 10

ok, brandi_knott just sux, and sonicgt has me lmao!

i have no probs w/ gay marriages. as long as 2 ppl love each other, marriage is a beautiful thing regardless of the sexes. i know there's that strain btwn religion and sexuality...but i honestly feel that a person's sexuality is something that they're born w/. trying to fight it is going against nature's course. and to condemn someone for that is just flat-out wrong!

i look @ it this way: we're all sinners. unless ur name is jesus, ur far short of being perfect. all u can do is love god, love urself, and love others.

Answer 11

I am glad to finally find a good Christian like yourself. A Christian who are not closed minded and love all people. God loves all people and God doesnt judge. For all you narrowed minded Christians, look at what you should act like. This is a true Christian not a hypocrit that most Christians act like.