English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Then does God also forbid an infertile/impotent man or a barren/infertile woman from getting married? After all, neither of these two can sire/mother a child, and therefore the marriage would not be capable of fulfilling God's divine purpose.

For the sake of those who'd argue, 'but it would be possible', assume the man has been castrated due to testicular cancer, or the woman has had a hysterectomy due to ovarian and uterine cancer. At this point, you'd need a miracle, but if we're going to go for miracles, an omnipotent God could create a miracle for two gay guys or two gay gals too.

So, what's the REAL reason for this objection? Because of the nature of marriage, or because of some Christian's "ick"-factor towards homosexuality?

2007-01-03 06:42:45 · 31 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

TTC: I'll admit a certain bias. And frankly, I'm a little torqued off at the gay lobby who claim I want marriage as a right -- I do, but I think they've gone about it wholely the wrong way... we should have had civil union/domestic partnership in 50% of the states before we EVER went after the word.

So on this issue, we're not entirely enemies.

However, consider my question as this -- Christians make a claim. I've presented a conflict in that claim. How a Christian resolves that conflict requires thought, even if just enough to build a strawman arguement against it.

I've got nothing against people thinking through their beliefs. I think it's a good thing.

2007-01-03 06:55:09 · update #1

epa: In a way, you are correct. I should have been more explicit in stating, "When asked, SOME Christians make the claim that..."

I should have been more clear. My apologies.

2007-01-03 06:57:49 · update #2

Lindy: Do some research. Homosexuality is well founded and well expressed in the animal kingdom, we are not unique as a species in male-male or female-female bonding.

For example, I forget which zoo, but I recently read a news article about a pair of male penguins who are monogamously mated and when provided an egg, have raised the chick as their own.

Bonobo monkeys have a social structure that is heavily sexual in nature.

Further, your assumption that two homosexuals must engage in anal intercourse is false, there are other arrangements, and there is the possibility that you may have two males, two females, or a male-female paring, who have no interest in physical intimacy. It does happen.

2007-01-03 07:09:25 · update #3

insania:

Did I ask you to agree with me? Or did I ask you to think about something and give me your viewpoint/opinion?

If your opinion is only that 'i am right, you are wrong, asking me to think is an attack on me' then you have a very poor opinion.

2007-01-03 09:31:44 · update #4

31 answers

the problem with marriage, is that it was never intended to be a holy union. It was not created by God, but by man. It was a bartering system, in exchange for their daughters they got other property/payment. A priest/minister was to oversee the union to give God's blessing. So for those who are using the bible to argue against it, they are just way off.
With the other questions you had... then you are delving into the extreme sects of religion. Where it is going against gods will to seek medical treatment, etc...
Using the bible to debate gay marriage is just the only weapon some people have access to.

2007-01-03 06:49:28 · answer #1 · answered by Chrissy 7 · 3 1

I'm guessing it's the "ick" factor that they THINK is backed up by their "Lord". That, and they're very protective of the word "marriage". They always talk about it as though it's THEIR word, THEIR property, and anyone daring to encroach upon THEIR territory better leave at once and find another way to attain the exact same situation for themselves.

Marriage laws don't exist to uphold the ideals which opponents want the institution to reflect, so that it might be "morally violated" in their eyes is of no consequence when considering the legalization of same sex marriage.

Remember: there is no clause that requires people to be capable of procreation in order to marry. There is no written or unspoken requirement compelling each couple to enter into the contract with only the intentions that are considered "pure" or "proper". There is no small print at the bottom of the actual contract which states that every person involved in the union must behave, believe or live in any certain way.

The majority may feel that the institution SHOULD represent one certain concept (i.e. that it exists strictly for making families) or set of values (i.e. according to the Christian Bible) but marriage law and contracts have never translated that desire into any sort of obligation.

Unfortunately the majority has the power to legislate their unfounded feelings into law. They don't see the other couples, heterosexual couples, who might get married for reasons that aren't "appropriate" or "natural". They only see SAME SEX COUPLES who they already disapprove of. Why give a seconds thought to the people who DON'T send them into a "righteous fury"? Just make sure that the "Biblically condemned" gays are fenced out.

2007-01-03 06:48:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

From the Bible, Homosexuality is a sin. Marriage is for the purpose of having kids.

Men and women were created for a purpose, and part of that purpose was to multiply.

2 men can't have a child nor can 2 women. It takes an equal amount of genes from both to make a child.

I have a gay sister and as much as I want her to be happy, marriage (in the truest sence) is wrong. If the goverment wants civil unions, then I have no problems with that.

Mariage deonotes a special relationship and a big part of that is the ability to produce children.

2007-01-03 07:34:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

OK - Responding to your comment:

Ha! You got a point. I'll take out the defensive statements.

Gay marriage is considered wrong because homosexuality is considered a sin in christianity and marriage was defined by God as a union between a man and a woman. Nothing more, nothing less.

Since you are picking on the christian stance we have to look at a christian source, the bible, and see what it says about the whole idea.

On homosexuality:

1 Thessalonians 4:3
For this is the will of God, your sanctification; that is, that you abstain from sexual immorality;

Strong's Number: 4202 Browse Lexicon
Original Word Word Origin
porneia from (4203)
Transliterated Word TDNT Entry
Porneia 6:579,918
Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech
por-ni'-ah Noun Feminine

Definition
illicit sexual intercourse
adultery, fornication, homosexuality, lesbianism, intercourse with animals etc.
sexual intercourse with close relatives; Lev. 18
sexual intercourse with a divorced man or woman; Mk. 10:11,
metaph. the worship of idols
of the defilement of idolatry, as incurred by eating the sacrifices offered to idols


On marriage:
Genesis 2:18 - 24

2:18
Then the LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone; I will make him a helper suitable for him."
2:19
Out of the ground the LORD God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the sky, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever * the man called a living creature, that was its name.
2:20
The man gave names to all the cattle, and to the birds of the sky, and to every beast of the field, but for Adam there was not found a helper suitable for him.
2:21
So the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place.
2:22
The LORD God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.
2:23
The man said, "This is now bone of my bones, And flesh of my flesh; She shall be called Woman, Because she was taken out of Man."
2:24
For this reason * a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

You can plainly see that marriage is just not about making babies, it's about companionship between a man and a woman. The making babies part is just the fun part of what you get to do in marriage.

Since being a christian means you take the bible at face value it is safe to reason that we are against gay marriage because we believe that:

Marriage is the union between a man and woman.

Homosexuality is a sexual sin.

That's it.

As a christian we are instructed to love our neighbors (which include our brothers and our enemies.)

If a christian hates a gay person then he is sinning plain and simple.

That love, however, does not mean we don't think homosexuality is a sin...

2007-01-03 07:16:50 · answer #4 · answered by Emperor Insania Says Bye! 5 · 0 1

Our Creator established rules governing marriage long before governments began regulating the institution. The opening book of the Bible tells us: “A man will leave his father and his mother and he must stick to his wife and they must become one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24) The Hebrew word “wife,” according to Vine’s Expository Dictionary of Biblical Words, “connotes one who is a female human being.” Jesus confirmed that those yoked together in marriage should be “male and female.”—Matthew 19:4.

Thus, God intended marriage to be a permanent and an intimate bond between a man and a woman. Men and women are designed to complement each other so they may be capable of satisfying each other’s emotional, spiritual, and sexual needs and desires.

2007-01-03 06:52:04 · answer #5 · answered by papa G 6 · 2 1

It seems that with new advances in medical technology, women can now have children without the need for male sperm.
So lesbian marriage should be OK.
So it's just those weaselly little f-ag-gots, hold on I just had a thought.
What happens if a gay man has a sex change before the wedding and changes back after, or is that using satanic science.
Sorry i am trying to mix science with religion and made the mistake of using common sense too.
My brain is meltingggggggggg...........................

2007-01-03 06:52:28 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Who says that a infertile person can not have a child? With God all things are possible.

There are at least 2 people in the Bible that are mentioned were "barren" and had children.

Add to that the fact that IF a couple were to marry, and one was "infertile", there is still the possibility that something can happen.

2007-01-03 06:51:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

It is Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve. God's original purpose was for there to be a perfect world where testicular cancer for example would not exist. As tragedy would have it, humans destroyed the earth and ruined themselves. Therfore, christians abide by the bible as much as possible, and will avoid homosexuality, which is denounced by god. Look up these texts in your bible:
(Romans 1:27-32) These texts show that homosexual deserve deserve death in the eyes of god.

2007-01-03 06:56:47 · answer #8 · answered by tony c 2 · 1 2

well, you're not supposed to have sex until you get married. so, assuming we all live by this really unlikely ideal, how could the bible say "don't get married if you are barren" since according to biblical law you should have no clue yet if you are barren or not due to never having the chance to try to reproduce?

however, the bible DOES say that men who are castrated or have damaged testicles (and therefore can't reproduce) cannot marry a jew.

2007-01-03 06:52:08 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

well for your information a lot of the fertility problems that face couples today are all the toxins that our bodys ingest everyday for the past 50 plus years! how stupid could you be to compare an infertile couple to gays! Read the bible it is an abomination against God for a man to lay with another man as he would a woman! God will be your judge no me or society so if you want to be a FP go right aheah but don't compare the bond between a woman and a man like gays

2007-01-03 06:49:19 · answer #10 · answered by kissybertha 6 · 2 3

fedest.com, questions and answers