I agree with you wholeheartedly! Those people who single out homosexuals are "conservative" heterosexuals. They don't see themselves as ever being on the receiving end of the discrimination just because a person is gay. On the other hand, they (not all mind you) want to leave the option open for pre-marital sex or divorce because those two situations could in fact pose a possibility for them in their life. It is a double standard that some follow. And as far as the argument about two same sex partners not having children, well there is artificial insemination and adoption. Personally I think the "conservatives" need to stop trying to ruin innocent people's lives and let them be.
2006-08-14 16:05:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by lilbitadevil 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Heterosexual marriage brings us back to what we should have been doing all along. If a person used to be involved in homosexuality and then decides to leave all that behind to enter a heterosexual marriage, that person is returning to a normal lifestyle. Big difference.
Also, liberals seem to think that the main purpose of the law is to protect the rights of individuals, while some conservatives think the law is mainly to punish the guilty. A better view is that the law should help to bring about what is best for society. Homosexual marriage would not bring about anything good. It would encourage people to get married for the legal and monetary benefits. The ones who would suffer the most would be children. Although many single parents do a great job raising kids, there are many children who are hurt by this. Our future generation is at risk. Where will we find the great leaders of tomorrow? How many great leaders will there be? How many others will be more of a burden to our/their economic system?
The correct thing to do is to strengthen families and try to give as many kids as possible the best environment to grow up in. That being a home with a mom and a dad.
2006-08-14 15:35:40
·
answer #2
·
answered by unicorn 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The basis for denial of marriage to people of the same sex actually has nothing to do with "The Bible." Therefore, your reasoning is without any proper basis.
The marriage law, defining marriage as between a man and a woman, passed in 1996 and signed by President Clinton, was not a judgement on morals, but on legality.
Allowing any two people to be called husband and wife would have a great deal of problems, from income tax laws to insurance company regulations.
2006-08-14 15:30:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by mia2kl2002 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
some what true, but God also said to submit your self to the government for he placed them in his stead. Whether right or wrong the word says to follow your government. Homosexuality breaks down the very essence of family. A family is a man and a woman who are married and have children. To reproduce and create life, that's a man and a woman's physical job. Now a two men or two women can not create life together, unless by adoption or artificially, but that's still not creating life. Its borrowing another child as your own. And no divorce is not punishable by death the bible says if the right criteria are meet then its OK if not it is still adultery.
2006-08-14 15:31:21
·
answer #4
·
answered by R J 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
There you go again, misquoting God's book.
Only Jews are required to keep the 613 commandments found in the Old Testament. God's covenant is with Israel, Jews. There is will find same sex relationships and adultery explicitly cover. You will not find premarital sex or abortion discussed.
For Christian, the requirement can be found in 1 Cor 10:23-24 . There is no discussion regarding same sex marriage (either way). As well as abortion.
So what are we guilty about? Sex before marriage, divorce, adultery, and same sex relationship? Oh yes, abortion. And I guess we are guilty about same sex marriage as well.
The bible (Christian in my case) is the word of God as spoken through the prophets. It tells about God's covenant with Israel and about a second covenant to the Gentiles (non Jew). The Epistles go to great lengths about the Law as it no longer applied to the Christian. If it no longer applies, why is everyone so eager to quote there favorite "laws".
All we have is 1 Cor 10:23-24. Use that criteria and see if you really can say "bible mentions...." If so, show me where that is in the Epistles. (Why not the Gospels? Jesus administered to the Jews.)
So read 1 Cor 10:23-24 and get back to me because I did read the book.
2006-08-14 15:36:13
·
answer #5
·
answered by J. 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Perhaps the more compelling question is why homosexuals would want to be married in the first place.
Marriage is not a civil institution, it's a religious one, which was defined by God as being between a man and a woman. So it's not a matter of denying any particular group of people marriage; it's just that unless it's one man and one woman, it's not a marriage, not in the eyes of God, anyway. Past behavior has nothing to do with it.
Here's what I find interesting; how long did the activist (you find this word unkind? I simply refer to it in the sense of political lobbying efforts) homosexual community lobby for "civil unions"? And as they started to see some states permit that, all of a sudden that's not good enough, it has to be called a "marriage"? Well, they can call it an amusement park if they want to, the bottom line is the Bible defines what a true marriage is.
In any event, if marriage is an institution set forth by God, and God himself defined it as being between a man and a woman, aren't two homosexuals who want to get "married" really just making fools of themselves? Why aren't "civil unions" enough? They get every right afforded married couples by law under this arrangement. So what's the issue?
Here's the issue. After 20-30 years of homosexual activism, there is no level to which they will be "accepted" that is enough for them. What is it they have yet to gain? If they are really interested in their rights, name the right they have yet to have gained? If they are "born that way", I have just as much right arguing for minority status being left-handed as they do for being homosexual. But in the name of "sensitivity", we're supposed to throw common sense out the window? Give me a break.
You can agree with me or not, but my logic here is pretty sound. What have I said that was biased, insensitive, or cruel? I have stated one opinion, and history would support my conclusion.
2006-08-14 15:40:02
·
answer #6
·
answered by You'll Never Outfox the Fox 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
You missed the Biblical argument on homosexual marriage, here. The idea that homosexuals should be denied marriage is not because being gay is considered a sin, it is that the Bible holds the state of matrimony to be a sacred union of a man and a woman...only..not a man and a man or a woman and a woman. It's the marriage issue, not the sin issue.
2006-08-14 15:32:41
·
answer #7
·
answered by artistagent116 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
I agree that fornication and adultery are serious sins-even criminal in some instances. God looks upon both with prejudice. But homosexuality is absolute perversion. In fact many turn gay as a result of rejecting God, read Romans 1:18 and following. Once a person turns gay they are cursed, most will not recover.
2006-08-14 15:33:16
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Well first of all , Marriage is not a piece of paper. It is excepting your loved one under God. Man made the laws of putting it on paper. (think about it, you think God handed Adam and Eve a notarized paper saying they must now pay Taxes as one)
Second of all I do not think that Adultery should go unpunished. I believe that they will be.
And lastly i think it is a sin to use the bible to single out only those things that work for them, and ignore ones that they themselves have done. If they have the beliefs that homosexuals will burn, then they have to except that all of Gods rules that are broken will also be punishable. (sp?)
2006-08-14 15:46:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Charisma 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Your right, people are ruining the significance of marriage. That is why I think we should stop as much as we can. You dont say "well some of the kids in the classroom are going crazy so ill just give up and let them all go crazy." No, you stop as much as you can. Marriage was intended for a man and a woman to be united. It is coming together in the eyes of God. God doesnt support homosexuality so why should they be allowed it.
Plus everyone is yelling SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!!! You allow God to be taken out of the state and school, yet this time you want to let the state change the church. The church follows God, God doesnt support homosexual marriage. You say yourself the state shouldnt interfere with the church, so therefore you say there shouldnt be same sex marriage.
2006-08-14 15:29:31
·
answer #10
·
answered by A* 4
·
1⤊
2⤋