Why are people against gay marriage?

Question

Some people say it destroys the sanctity of marriage, but hasn't divorce and adultery already done that?

Others state it is a sin, but the Bible has only four implied admonishments against homosexuality and over 350 admonishments against heterosexuality. If marriage is a sin, then in theory the gay couple just has to find "God" and ask for forgiveness for their sins to get into heaven.

Then there is the argument that gays should have the rights of a married couple, but does not violate equal rights and the separation of church and state?

I would like to know as many arguments against gay marriage as possible.

Answer 1

They oppose it out of ignorance...plain and simple.

For those who say its unnatural, you are simply wrong...first off gays are not created by anything other than nature, we are the essence of "natural." Second, in case you are not aware and knowing how ignorant the opponents are I am sure they are not aware, homosexuality has been observed in most mammals, so its not unnatural. Third, the concept of monogamous marriage is rather unnatural, most mammals (and humans ARE mammals, not divine beings) do not mate for life or practice monogamy. Our closest relatives in terms of species screw around almost indiscriminately.

So there's nothing unnatural about it. Those who oppose the concept are socially conditioned and are reacting from what has been drilled into their heads from birth--daily you are bombarded with messages that its between men and women only and that it should be only one marriage ever. Neither is accurate--these days multiple marriages is the norm, birth outside of marriage most common.

As to homosexuals and "marriage" look are earlier civilizations where homosexual relationships were condoned--Rome had it, the Spartans had it and in most ancient places, it was not forbidden. Even in medieval europe certain homosexual relationships were endorsed and even a form of marriage.

Turning to the bible, there are 19 references against homosexuals--18 of them in the old testament, only one in the new by St. Paul. Christ never condemned them and wouldn't have. So don't fall back on your religion, Christ's word is supreme and we can infer from no condemnation of homosexuals that he had no problems with it....besides he was unmarried and hung out with 12 guys! ;-)

Marriage is a legal civil contract in the law. We have a 5th Amendment in our Constitution (and a 14th Amendment) which guarantees equal protection. Explain to me why you can violate the equal protection clause by denying homosexuals the right to enter into a civil contract? What is your legal basis? There is none. Which is actually what the Massachusetts and Vermont Supreme Courts have decided. Which is exactly what the Dutch and the Danes have decided.....

So you go study your history, your religion and your law and you will see that the opponents of gay marriage are simply wrong and misguided by religious bigots.

Now turning to the current state of affairs--gay people who cannot marry are encouraged not to have stable relationships sanctioned by law--that means they feel freer to sleep around--which of course adds to the load of sexually transmitted diseases being passed around (which mysteriously find their way to married men...think about that one for a few minutes!). It also means that when they do form stable relationships, you are denying them the right to inherit from their partner (unless expensive and inflexible legal documents are drawn up), you deny them the right to be at their partners bedside when in the hospital for surgery or when they are dying. You deny them the legal right not to testify against each other (in most states Husbands and Wives cannot be compelled to do this). Of course a partnered pair of gay men or women also do not get certain tax benefits and are in some places denied the right to adopt children. Some spouses in divorces by claiming the other spouse is gay have even successfully cut off the rights of the gay spouse to child visitation and custody. Thus, not only do you deny them them the right to marry, you also deny them some basic human decency and legal benefits conferred on married straight people Think of this in terms of "equal protection."

You should conclude that in our secular civil society some people are not treated so equally and tje problem of denying gay marriage should start to sound like the problems suffered by women until recently, and blacks as well (and some say these two groups still suffer from unequal treatment).

Just plain ignorance in a democracy drives this problem....unfortunately ignorance is everywhere.

A Lawyer here and a gay one at that!

Answer 2

"Others state it is a sin, but the Bible has only four implied admonishments against homosexuality and over 350 admonishments against heterosexuality. If marriage is a sin, then in theory the gay couple just has to find "God" and ask for forgiveness for their sins to get into heaven"

ROFL! If one truly accepts God as their savior, they stop doing these things that God has told them not to do. A gay that becomes a true christian would stop being gay. Any homos that accept God as their savior but stay gay are hypocrites and liars

Answer 3

I think that you have given a good arguement and contrast to both sides. I'm not going to argue religion b/c the truth is I have never read the whole bible. But I do believe that the only people who can destroy the sanctity of marriage are the ones that get married and don't honor the vows they give. If anything else is destroying it, it is our states not allowing 2 people who love eachother and will honor that commitment to join in marriage. I was just married on the 9th and if someone was to tell me I could not marry him it would be the worst thing in the world to me. I honestly wish that people would stop caring about how it would make them feel and start thinking about the people who cannot make that commitment to eachother, and how that must feel. And to be honest if we are going by the bible, how many of the people who are against gay marriage commit the same sins continually...just for example adultry.

Answer 4

I don't have an argument against Gay Marriage.
I don't care who wants to marry who.
It is a religious issue that should not ever enter the political arena.
If it is a sin, then God will sort it out.
Church, and State were designated as seperate entities in our Democracy.
If people have faith in a religion that designates gay marriage as a sin, then they should also have faith that their God is responsible for sorting it out.
I will never, in my lifetime support any legislation that injects religous beliefs into the law of the land.
What happens to all of that, if the majority of our political officials are, say, Budhist, (just for example) and they decide to pass laws that require all Americans to be Vegan (just for example). Would it be okay with all the Christains or Catholics (etc.) that want laws banning gay marriage, to be denied the right to eat meat, eggs, or milk if they choose. Would it be okay to decide what our laws should be based on any religion other than your own? If the answer is yes, then I could be persuaded to listen to the arguments against Gay Marriage. Until then leave your religion out of my Democracy, because it may not end up being that your chosen religion is the chosen religion of our political officials. A religous government would most certainly lead to internal warfare. Look around at the rest of our world to see examples of what happens when you allow the religous dictatorship that people are asking for when they want legislation to include gay marriage, stem cell research, putting God back into schools, or abortion.
Sorry that I can't provide you with an argument against Gay Marriage as you requested.

Answer 5

You know, i've wondered myself where half of these theories come from. We live in a society which is heavily rooted in Greco-Roman culture, which openly accepted not only homosexuality, but also pedophilia as well. (Slow down! I'm not supporting the pedophiles out there, I'm using ancient Greco-Roman culture as an example!)
We've also recently begun to turn our philosphies and business practices toward the East, specifically Japan. Guess what the Samurai used to do to their pages, or their apprentices?
Really, in this instance, what does a person's natural love for a person of the same sex have to do with the moral decay of society? Is it the last vestiges of our Puritanical foundations in this country trying to make one last, desperate grab at our senses of right and wrong, in a time where those definitions of yesteryear don't apply?
Then, there's the argument over how 'natural' it is. Okay, ever seen two male dogs go at it? How about a dog and a cat? Is that natural?
I really don't care what two consenting, loving adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom, (this opinion is, of course with its own limits as well, but those limits are logical and not based on what i think is sexually acceptable) and I also don't care to get between two people getting married, regardless of orientation.
I really do wish others would dummy up and stop trying to peep into the bedrooms of other people, its none of our collective business.
Let them love each other!

Answer 6

BILL OREILLY: "How do you answer people who say to you, "Listen. I'm an American citizen, I'm a homosexual. I have the right to get married if I don't hurt anybody. That's not going to impact negatively on society," how do you answer that?"

ALAN KEYES: "Well, I think the notion that getting married involves some kind of selfish individual right is partly the problem here. Marriage, as an institution, isn't about individual rights. As an institution, it is about safeguarding certain basic interests that the society has in the stability of the family as an institution, in the proper care of children in enforcing the mutual obligations of parenting between a husband and wife and toward the children. These are the reasons marriages are instituted by society, not that they are meant to cater to individual rights."

Answer 7

Honestly, I couldn't care less if they banned it or not, it wouldn't effect me at all.. right now. But later might be different. If they allow gay marriages, down the road when I have children, gay couples may feel as free as the traditional man-woman couples, meaning they would feel free to use PDA as much as a natural couple would and thats something I WOULD NOT want my kids to witness.

So I guess I'm against it also... sorry

Answer 8

The Bible does not bash heterosexual marriages, just homosexuals and beastiality. It does destroy sancity of marriage but the bible also is against divorce and audultry. it says that if you get a divorce and then remarry then you are still commiting adultry against your 1st husband/wife. i believe that it was meant for only a man and a women to get married b/c they can create offspring. the devil's goal is to wipe out human kind and if everyone turned gay then no one would be reproducing and we would die off.if homosexual marriage becomes legalized, then beastiality would be next. yes gays can ask for forgivness but then they have to change their ways also.

Answer 9

Coming from a straight conservative: I don't see the problem. Marriage is supposed to be about the love two people share with eachother. Just because people aren't straight shouldn't mean that they aren't allowed to live a happy life with the person they want to spend the rest of their lives with. It's really all tragic how so many people don't understand that.

Answer 10

It's basically a human psychology question. People don't want other people who they believe to be "beneath them" to have the same rights and opportunities they have. This is seen across the board with homosexual relationships, minorities and women. When someone within these groups meets the standard criteria, the rules are changed.