Gay Marriage

What I dislike about this discussion is the people who just simply don't get the point. Like I was watching 10 o'clock live, which is a satirical comedy show about the week's news on Channel 4 in the UK, and they were talking about gay marriage becoming legal in England and they showed this interview with some well respected English actor who said and I quote "But wouldn't it be the same thing as me wanting to marry my son so I could pass inheritance to him easier." He went on to say that gay marriage is the SAME as incest. I don't know how these people manage to go through life with a mentality like that.

Marriage isn't a religious thing, you can do it in a church, but I believe it was originally just easier for monetary purposes and they wouldn't even do it in a church or registry they would just be married if the woman said yes. Marriage has NOTHING to do with religion, in my opinion. You should be able to be with the person you love in the way you want no matter your sexual orientation.
And just like that poster says "if you don't like gay marriage, don't get gay married."

Also this might be old news but what do you guys think about the Lonely Island song/video sort of on this topic.
Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Q9rLdxS7CE The song starts at 1.43

I am just going to say my opinion. Please do not judge. I am not gay, but I think it is unfair to not let them marry. They are just people. You are supposed to accept people for who they are. Also, God made those people that way. So why say that it is a sin?
Again, just my opinion. Not trying to sound rude, and not trying to dis on any of your opinions.

@ treat02

treat02:

You are supposed to accept people for who they are. Also, God made those people that way. So why say that it is a sin?

I guess that's exactly the point. Most Christians think people are gay by choice and this "decision" goes against God's will (or at least that's how I understand it, I'm not Christian).

At least, as I see it, following Christianism and accepting gay rights are mutually excluding points of view. After all, Christians follow the Bible and problems start right in Genesis when God says men and women are supposed to "become one flesh" and their mission is to "fill the Earth". And then later on God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because they went against God's rule and "fell in the sin" of homosexuality (in the Christian interpretation anyway, Jews see this episode in a completely different way).

This means, if you're a Christian and accept the Bible and the Christian interpretation of the Bible, you won't accept gays as made by God the way they are, they'll always be "the deviant". I'm not trying to bash you, your religion, or anything, I'm only trying to understand here how can people support gay people and accept certain things as truth in their religion, at the same time. For the sake of coherence, a person will have to choose between both alternatives at some point, won't they?

@ Filth in the Beauty
Well I'm sort of Christian, in a Church of England way and I don't go to church or know anyone that isn't an atheist and I do not take the Bible literally if at all. I'm also extremely liberal and think that people can mostly do what they want.
I think the issue here is with the ignorance of the individual or just them having a lack of information. I agree that it is hypocritical of say a devout catholic that attends church meetings and donates money to believe in gay rights.

Filth in the Beauty:

At least, as I see it, following Christianism and accepting gay rights are mutually excluding points of view. After all, Christians follow the Bible and problems start right in Genesis when God says men and women are supposed to "become one flesh" and their mission is to "fill the Earth". And then later on God destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah because they went against God's rule and "fell in the sin" of homosexuality (in the Christian interpretation anyway, Jews see this episode in a completely different way).

Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed after the inhabitants of Sodom tried to rape God's angels (and Lot "kindly" offered his virgin daughters to be raped in exchange for them) - if after reading Genesis, you think the great unnatural sin God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for was men having consensual sex with each other, not rape, never mind homophobia and gay marriage, your reading of the Bible is extremely biased and misogynistic.

@ kafka.

kafka.:

if after reading Genesis, you think the great unnatural sin God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for was men having consensual sex with each other, not rape, never mind homophobia and gay marriage, your reading of the Bible is extremely biased and misogynistic.

my reading of the Bible has nothing to do with this.
Christians say the problem with Sodom was homosexuality, consensual or not. Jews, for instance, think the problem was lack of hospitality. Personally, I don't think anything of it, I wasn't there and I'm not Christian nor Jew
The problem here is interpretation, and I only mentioned how Christians chose to interpret that part of the Bible.

@ schrodinger's cat.
I can understand when a person sort of goes their own path. It's just not so clear to me when someone says they're 100% committed Christians and/or devout to a church and still support gays. Nothing against it, to each their own, everyone is free to do what they please and believe whatever, but I see a contradiction there.

I prefer to think people don't understand their own religion that well, or didn't give it too much thought, but yes, this looks like hypocrisy to me.

@ Filth in the Beauty

Who are these "Christians"? There are many different branches of Christianity and many different Christian readings of this section of the Bible given that it's a) fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, and b) neither Christ nor the New Testament writers left us any authoritative readings of this particular section. Whole branches of Christianity have radically different interpretations of sin and redemption - some Christians don't believe in original sin, some think human being are inherently and completely sinful - some think we are all unworthy of redemption, but God sometimes chooses to save some people, others believe in ultimate universal salvation - why is it that someone who can't even recognise the most basic truth of the Bible i.e. that it's God's Word gets to judge how accurate our readings of the Bible are?

@ kafka.

the three main and largest branches of Christianity (Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox), think the same way about homosexuality and gay unions and interpret the Genesis in a similar way. That's why I'm generalizing and saying "Christians think this way". But all my ears to know about other Christian churches/traditions who don't share this same point of view.

Post edited by moderator for breaking Mibba's discussion rules.

@ kafka.
that was downright rude. Our discussion ends here.

@ Filth in the Beauty

And telling a gay person she must be a hypocrite if she's a Christian and doesn't think people like her are unnatural abominations, despite the fact that a simple google search would have revealed that different Christian denominations take different views on LGBT people, ranging from violent homophobia to complete acceptance, was not rude at all??

kafka.:

@ Filth in the Beauty

And telling a gay person she must be a hypocrite if she's a Christian and doesn't think people like her are unnatural abominations, despite the fact that a simple google search would have revealed that different Christian denominations take different views on LGBT people, ranging from violent homophobia to complete acceptance, was not rude at all??

Rudeness should not demand a rude response, especially in a debate; there are diplomatic ways of explaining both that you think/know someone is wrong and that you feel someone has been rude to you. Condescension is not likely to make someone cooperate with any problems you have with something they have said.

---

For anyone interested in discussions about gay marriage or gay rights in general, I highly recommend read/watching John Corvino's material. He is a philosophy professor and gay rights writer/lecturer/advocate, and has co-written a book on the debating of same-sex marriage with Maggie Gallagher, an opponent of it. Great reading.

Alex; periphery.:

Rudeness should not demand a rude response, especially in a debate; there are diplomatic ways of explaining both that you think/know someone is wrong and that you feel someone has been rude to you. Condescension is not likely to make someone cooperate with any problems you have with something they have said.

You don't think that reply is condescending?

pravda.:

You don't think that reply is condescending?

No, or I would not have posted it.

Alex; periphery.:

No, or I would not have posted it.

I guess condescension is in the eye of the beholder.

@ dru's troubled soul
I agree. But you can't really look at 2 people and SEE if they are atheists, but you can tell if there is a boy and a boy "together."

Sometimes people just are unfamiliar to how people are different from them.

@ Kurtni
The KKK is a society MAINLY against African Americans. Catholics believe many different things. I don't mean to sound rude, but when you say something like this, it implies all Catholics really care about is preventing gays from being together, which is not true.

@ mayme_moo
Yes! Some Christians (I am a Christian, but I believe in gay rights) say that they CHOOSE to be gay. Well, do you choose to who you are really in love with? That's why I don't understand!

@ Filth in the Beauty
It's one thing in Christianity that I don't agree with.

I'd just like to mention that New Zealand recently Passed the Redefinition of Marriage Act. Which in Practice Legalized Gay Marriage. This I feel is another major step that New Zealand has taken to equal rights. An important qualification that was made during the passing of the act, was that the Laws are about the state, and parliament is supposed to Legislate for the State, and has nothing to do with Religion. However it was also reaffirmed that at least in New Zealand a Religious Minister is not forced to marry any couple, if they feel it goes against their religious beliefs, they never have has too. At least in Law the right to Marry cannot be excluded based on sexuality, regardless of the religious view of the country. And I am glad that our parliament acknowledged that fact.