Anti-gay marriage folks...?

Question

Every time I see an argument against gay marriage, there are two predominant features.

One is the sentence that begins, "God made marriage...." You can stop right there. God is irrelevant when it comes to the laws that govern all of us. Your God has no place in our laws.

The second argument is something like, "Marriage is supposed to be..." This argument is also bull. "Marriage" is not some God we worship. We don't have to do what marriage tells us to do. It is an institution that serves US, not the other way around. And if an institution exists that no longer serves us as adult human beings, we have a right and responsibility to change it.

Comments?

Answer 1

This is not a religious comment or arguement.

Why isn't it enough for marriage if two people have feelings for each other?

Marriage is about more than just the feelings of two people. Feelings are important, but they aren't the whole of it. We all know that feelings change and that any marriage has its ups and downs. A good marriage has more ups than downs, a bad one more downs than ups, but emotions change from one day to the next. Sometimes they're very loving, and sometimes they're very negative.

Marriage does involve very personal feelings, but this does not mean that it is merely a private matter. Whether it succeeds or fails, a marriage has a huge impact on the couple, their children, those around them, and the entire society. As an institution, marriage is the business of everyone in society. It takes more than emotion to hold a marriage together, as we have seen.

What does the scientific evidence show about homosexuality?

In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of diagnostic disorders. In retrospect, this decision appears to have been inspired by political pressure rather than medical evidence.

Homosexuals of both sexes remain fourteen times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexuals47 and 3½ times more likely to commit suicide successfully.48 Thirty years ago, this propensity toward suicide was attributed to social rejection, but the numbers have remained largely stable since then despite far greater public acceptance than existed in 1973. Study after study shows that male and female homosexuals have much higher rates of interpersonal maladjustment, depression, conduct disorder, childhood abuse (both sexual and violent), domestic violence, alcohol or drug abuse, anxiety, and dependency on psychiatric care than heterosexuals.49 Life expectancy of homosexual men was only forty-eight years before the AIDS virus came on the scene, and it is now down to thirty-eight.50 Only 2 percent of homosexual men live past age sixty-five.51

Male homosexuals are prone to cancer (especially anal cancer, which is almost unheard-of in male heterosexuals) and various sexually transmitted diseases, including urethritis, laryngitis, prostatitis, hepatitis A and B, syphilis, gonorrhea, chlamydia, herpes, and genital warts (which are caused by the human papilloma virus, which also causes genital cancers).52 Lesbians are at lower risk for STDs but at high risk for breast cancer.53 Homosexuals of both sexes have high rates of drug abuse, including cocaine, marijuana, LSD and other psychedelics, barbiturates, and amyl nitrate.54

Male homosexuals are particularly prone to develop sexually transmitted diseases, in part because of the high degree of promiscuity displayed by male homosexuals. One study in San Francisco showed that 43 percent of male homosexuals had had more than 500 sexual partners.55 Seventy-nine percent of their sexual partners were strangers. Only 3 percent had had fewer than ten sexual partners.56 The nature of sodomy contributes to the problem among male homosexuals. The rectum is not designed for sex. It is very fragile. Indeed, its fragility and tendency to tear and bleed is one factor making anal sex such an efficient means of transmitting the AIDS and hepatitis viruses.

Lesbians, in contrast, are less promiscuous than male homosexuals but more promiscuous than heterosexual women: One large study found that 42 percent of lesbians had more than ten sexual partners.57 A substantial percentage of them were strangers. Lesbians share male homosexuals' propensity for drug abuse, psychiatric disorder, and suicide.58

The statistics speak for themselves: If homosexuals of either gender are finding satisfaction, why the search for sex with a disproportionately high number of strangers? In view of the evidence, homosexuals will not succeed at establishing exclusive relationships. Promiscuity is a hard habit for anyone to break, straight or homosexual. Promiscuous heterosexuals often fail to learn fidelity; male homosexuals are far more promiscuous than heterosexual males, and therefore far more likely to fail. Lesbians are more promiscuous than heterosexual women. There is little good data on the stability of lesbian relationships, but it is reasonable to speculate that their higher rates of promiscuity and various deep-seated psychological problems would predispose them to long-term relational instability. Existing evidence supports this speculation.59

The more radical homosexual activists flaunt their promiscuity, using it as a weapon against what they call "bourgeois respectability."60 But even more conservative advocates of gay marriage such as New Republic editor Andrew Sullivan admit that for them, "fidelity" does not mean complete monogamy, but just somewhat restrained promiscuity.61 In other words, they admit that exclusiveness will not happen. And without exclusiveness, their "marriages" will have little meaning.

Sullivan argues that marriage civilizes men, but anthropology would counter that marriage to women civilizes men. Male humans, homosexual or heterosexual, are more interested in random sex with strangers than women are.62 Men need to be civilized, to be taught the joys of committed sex, and that lesson is taught by marriage to women, not by other men who need to learn it themselves. The apparent instability of lesbian relationships suggests that lesbians understand that lesson less well than heterosexual women do. Exclusivity will not happen, and without exclusivity, marriage does not exist.

Without exclusivity, permanent and unconditional relationships will not happen, either. By definition, a relationship that allows for "cruising" will be shallow and mutually exploitative, just as sex with strangers is shallow and mutually exploitative. So far, same-sex marriage is 0 for 3: likely to be neither exclusive nor unconditional nor permanent.

Can homosexual unions be life-giving?

Homosexual sex is not procreative and thus not live-giving in the most literal and important sense of the term. Further, the health statistics are clear. Any sexual behaviors that cut longevity almost in half before the AIDS virus came on the scene are death-dealing, not life-giving. The longevity and disease numbers speak for themselves. So do the psychiatric and drug abuse numbers. Likewise, promiscuity statistics suggest that homosexual activity is not providing much fulfillment to its practitioners. If it were, they would not feel the need for sex with armies of strangers. The statistics make it very clear that homosexual behavior is not enhancing anyone's inner well-being; in that sense, too, it is anything but life-giving.

What about situations in which homosexuals adopt children or use artificial insemination?

There is almost no good data to answer this question. We know that children raised in families containing one non-biological parent are dozens of times more likely to be abused than children raised by both biological parents.63 In some studies, children raised by homosexual partners seem to suffer from sex-role confusion.64 Studies by Cameron and Cameron have shown a high incidence of incest between minor children and homosexual parents of both sexes.65 These investigators suggest that homosexual parents may be more likely to abuse their children sexually than heterosexual parents, so although the point is not definitively proven, the available evidence is worrisome.

http://www.catholic.com/library/gay_marriage.asp
.

Answer 2

I understand what you are saying. I do however follow the bible and not man. So with that being said I wouldn't care if two men or women got married. Who am I to judge what others do. We all 'gay' or 'not' will answer to God when that time comes. I do think that if people looked in to there lives they would find that they also sin every day. To be a true follower of God then one must stop casting hate on people that are different from them.

I should also point out that I do not vote. I do not feel that man can offer me anything. On the other hand I know that God can ,and until his government is in rule I will continue to try and love every one.. And yes even ones who are gay..
I wish you the best out of life.

Answer 3

I got identified with the herpes simplex virus (type 2) about 5 yrs ago, when I was still attending college and had a mindless one-night stand. I know lots of girls say this, but I swear I had never done that sort of thing before. I just made a huge mistake that one time and all of a sudden I felt like I was going to have to live with the implications for the rest of my life. The hardest part was feeling I could never date men again. In the end, who wants to go out with someone that has sores around her private parts? But since a friend shared this movie https://tr.im/EmAbc everything got better.

Not only was I able to remove all remnants of the herpes simplex virus from my system in less than 3 weeks, but I was also able to start dating again. I even met the guy of my dreams and I'm so lucky to write that just a week ago, in front of everyone in a busy restaurant, he got down on one knee and proposed to me!!! This system provided me the opportunity to be happy and experience true love again. Now I hope that I can help others by sharing this story.

Answer 4

In fact, you're right. Marriage isn't supposed to be anything. Marriage serves the United States, not the people. So, if an uprising of pedophiles and ephebophiles were to rise up and demand marriage, why shouldn't we give it to them? If there are enough of them, why can't they marry little boys and girls and teenagers? After all, they love them, and they can teach the little boys and girls to do the same. There's nothing sacred about marriage, so what's the harm?
There are groups at work, such as the ACLU and NAMBLA, who work avidly to promote "man-boy love." There are also other pedophiles who would undoubtedly support the idea.
You may use the argument that a union between man-boy love is sick. Well, one hundred years ago, homosexuality was perceived as sick, immoral and disgusting. Then, as time went on, ideas changed. The American Psychological Association then reconsidered in the 1960s and 1970s and rediagnosed homosexuality as a mental illness and thought that homosexuals need treatment. They then removed it. Now, it's accepted by society and arguments are actually being made for gay marriage.
You may argue that gays are born gay. First, there's no evidence that homosexuality is innate. Second, the pedophiles argue that, too. A pedophile getting treatment was interviewed on CNN and he speculated that he was probably born a pedophile. Even John Walsh, commenting on Larry King Live on the Shawn Hornbeck case, speculated that pedophilia may be innate, like he thinks homosexuality may be. Pedophiles may be receiving psychological treatment now, but now long before society accepts them, before they, too, demand marriage?
Besides, if marriage is redefined by the gays, what's to stop it from being re-redefined by anyone else, such as pedophiles? They're born with it after all.

And what if someone wants to marry his mother, even when they're both grown? I mean, they're the opposite sex. By your twisted logic, they deserve marriage too, right? And what if the son is grown and loves his mother of his own volition?

You know what? You're totally right. Marriage isn't supposed to be anything at all. It's supposed to serve the people. And as the people's desires change and transform, so should marriage. It doesn't even matter if heterosexual marriage declines with respect for marriage, as has happened in some countries that have legalized homosexuality. It doesn't matter if our morals decline. It's alright. Right?

Answer 5

Okay, even if you don't believe in God, or the place in the Bible that says clearly, "Man should not lie with another man", let's forget the religious aspect, and just concentrate on society. It is people who condemn gay marriages, and laws that prohibit those unions. I believe that marriage was intended for a man and a woman together. However -- and this is a big however -- I see nothing wrong with a civil union, or other lifetime commitment between a gay or lesbian couple, that would entitle them to the privileges and benefits of a straight married couple, such as the bequest of property after the death of one partner, or insurance coverage, or recognition of other rights and privileges that are afforded to married couples. I think the biggest objection to "gay marriage" is the vernacular. Eliminate the word, "marriage" from the relationship, and substitute "Union" or "partnership" or "Alliance", or any other similar adjective, and my guess is that two gays who love each other and want to be together the rest of their lives, would not meet with such bitter opposition. Just my thoughts on the subject.

Answer 6

You are completely right!

Even if G-d DID have a place in government, He doesn't prohibit gay marriage. That is a Xtian invention a careful reading of the original Bible would show that the marriage and or love between a man and a man is not wrong.

But you are completely right. People shouldn't push their religious beliefs on the governmental laws that govern all.

Answer 7

I agree!

Marriage laws don't exist to uphold the ideals which same-sex marriage opponents want the institution to reflect. That the institution might be "violated", in their eyes, by same-sex marriage 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.

By the way, giving same-sex couples the consolation-prize of "civil unions" is like sitting them in the back of the bus... they might as well appreciate what they get so long as they get to sit on the bus at all, right? Wrong. Sorry... "separate but equal" didn't work in the past and it certainly shouldn't be making a come-back in this day and age when we should know better.

Answer 8

I think its time we start removing references to Christianity from our Constitution and State Constitutions! I purpose to start a "Stop the Church League" group now. Its sole purpose will be to rid the earth of Christianity and other religions that seek to rule mankind with their iron fists. In essence, it will bring about, "true peace and prosperity on the earth," by removing God's followers. Worshipping will be punishable by death, church property will be nationalized and given to the state and federal government. Foreign Governments can do as they please. Italy will share the Vatican's wealth as it sees fit.

This will happen, read Revelation, Ch. 17. & 18 (Babylon the Great).

Answer 9

It's amazing to me that anyone condemns gay marriage when straight marriages have a 50% divorce rate right now. Seems hypocritical.

Answer 10

SEPERATION FROM CHURCH AND STATE.
Nuff said, right?
Anyway, I say, if gays want to marry, then go for it. The bible thumpers just need to mind their own business and focus on learning to drive a little better. Overall, I agree.

Answer 11

our thoughts while well stated are still full of holes as most of our laws in this country,USA, are based on the Judea-Christian beliefs.
While you didn't say it directly you came close to saying God is irrelevant.
I assure you everything else may be, but God isn't.