Christians only: why should gay marriage be illegal?

by **fionnbharr** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:02 am

I need to get a straight answer once and for all. why do you christians think that gay marriage should be illegal based on your religious beliefs? I mean, it's great that it says so in the bible. but what about the people who DON'T live by the bible. shouldn't they be able to do what they want because they don't follow christianity?

here are my beliefs:

ARGUMENT: marriage is traditionally between a man and a woman
COUNTER-ARGUMENT: if it IS so-called "traditional", women would still be the properties of the men, no interracial marriages, and the only point of marriage would be an arranged union for economic purposes only. if two people love each other (whether it be M/F, M/M or F/F), then they shouldn't be barred from marrying.

ARGUMENT: gay marriage (or more specifically, homosexuality) is against god's will
COUNTER-ARGUMENT: here's a question: does it make sense for a christian to tell an atheist gay couple they can't get married? it's an illogical argument to those who don't believe there's a god. chrstianity isn't the state religion. america isn't a theocracy. we have freedom of religion. that means if someone doesn't believe that there's a god, then they don't have to. and if they don't believe there is a god, then the argument that gay marriage should be illegal because it's in the bible is irrevelant. GAY COUPLES SHOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE UNWANTED CHRISTIAN MORALS SHOVED IN THEIR FACES. christians who follow religion CAN still abide to the rules/laws/whatever that their religions set for them. a christian doesn't have to get a gay marriage just because they're legally able to. if they don't want to get a gay marriage, that's PERFECTLY fine. just keep out of the personal lives of people who DO want it (and who don't follow your religion).
BTW, if you are right and gay people DO do to hell, then that's what it is. let them do what they do right now, and let them "suffer" the consequences later. just keep to yourself and your OWN life only. let them do what they want.

ARGUMENT: the point of marriage is for procreation only
COUNTER-ARGUMENT: no. although procreation IS a major part of MOST marriages, it is not always so. there are straight married couples who choose NOT to have children. marriage is NOT for procreation (as non-married people can procreate anyways). the point of marriage is for two people who LOVE each other. again: if two people love each other, then they shouldn't be stopped from marrying.

overall, if a gay couple wants to get married, then they shouldn't be banned from doing so because an external religion says so. don't meddle in the lives of people you don't even know. mind your own business.

by **fiacre68** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:05 am

In this politically correct climate that relinquishes morality to the relativistic whims of society, stating that homosexuals should not marry is becoming unpopular. Should a woman be allowed to marry another woman? Should a man be allowed to marry another man? Should they be given legal protection and special rights to practice their homosexuality? No, they should not.

The Bible, of course, condemns homosexuality. It takes no leap of logic to discern that homosexual marriage is also condemned. But our society does not rely on the Bible for its moral truth. Instead, it relies on a humanistic and relativistic moral base upon which it builds its ethical structure.

Homosexuality is not natural. Just look at the male and female bodies. They are obviously designed to couple. The natural design is apparent. It is not natural to couple male with male and female with female. It would be like trying to fit two screws together and to nuts together and then say, "See, its natural for them to go together."

Homosexuals argue that homosexuality is natural since it occurs in the animal world. But this is problematic. It is true that this behavior occurs in the animal kingdom. But, it is also true that we see animals eating their prey alive. We see savagery, cruelty, and extreme brutality. Yet, we do not condone such behavior in our own society. Proponents of the natural order argument as a basis for homosexuality should not pick-and-choose the situations that best fit their agendas. They should be consistent and not compare us to animals. We are not animals. We are made in God's image. Logic says that if homosexuality is natural and acceptable because it exists in the animal world, then it must also be natural and acceptable to eat people alive. But, this is obviously faulty thinking. Therefore, appeal to the practice in the animal world as support for homosexual practice is equally faulty.

Political protection of a sexual practice is ludicrous. I do not believe it is proper to pass laws stating that homosexuals have 'rights.' What about pedophilia or bestiality? These are sexual practices. Should they also be protected by law? If homosexuality is protected by law, why not those as well?

Of course, these brief paragraphs can in no way exhaust the issue of homosexuality's moral equity. But, the family is the basis of our culture. It is the most basic unit. Destroy it and you destroy society and homosexuality is not helping the family.

What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?
Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross and repented of.

Christians should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same they would any other person in sin. They should treat homosexuals with the same dignity as they would anyone else because, like or not, they are made in the image of God. However, this does not mean that Christians should approve of their sin. Not at all. Christians should not compromise their witness for a politically correct opinion that is shaped by guilt and fear.

In fact the following verses should be kept in mind when dealing with homosexuals.

"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. 6 Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person," (Col. 4:5-6).
"But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith," (1 Tim. 1:5).
You do not win people to the Lord by condemning them and calling them names. This is why God says to speak with wisdom, grace, and love. Let the love of Christ flow through you so that the homosexuals can see true love and turn to Christ instead of away from Him.

by **reid** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:08 am

same reason polygamy is illegal (thats an arrangement between consenting adults also)

by **ahanu** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:14 am

To stop people being happy.

The Church's Master plan

by **urian27** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:17 am

I know some people that are not religious and they believe that gay marriage should be illegal as well, so your argument does not hand that water. That said, when we as Christians believe in God, and believe what God to say to be truth, that continues to be truth, whether someone else believes it or not. Your words "external religion" is not really the point here. The point is the heart.

by **vruyk** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:26 am

First because it changes the definition of marriage. We didn't vote to support any laws with this definition of marriage.

Secondly because the classic marriage is the best institution for having and raising their own children. Now I understand that many marriages don't result in children but all we can do is to support and encourage, not force.

If marriage was about love, the public wouldn't be involved. Public laws have no business supporting love.

by **byron92** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:34 am

Society has a right to regulate itself according to societal norms, the wishes of the electorate, and the spirit of the law.
Whether one group claims 'rights' and a different definition of laws, and lose a democratic vote on the matter, gives them no 'rights', no matter how they whine about it or protest about it.
A minority cannot dictate major changes to society through the courts when society as a whole does not want it, no matter how wrong they feel the law is, they must abide by the law. Those that want to dictate to society as a whole are doing a great disservice to the gay rights movement, as they portray gays as radicals and forcing society through the courts to recognize them creates a backlash in which the society, who the laws apply to, is not amused. Respect is earned, not legislated from the bench.
They would be better served having a campaign showing they are reasonable and responsible, rather than being drama queens.
You asked for an honest answer and I have respectfully given one. Agree or disagree, this is simply how it is. No need to pout.

by **nissim42** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:41 am

I am a Christian and I don't care if homosexuals marry each other. My answer to your question is that a lot of Christians don't actually want to ban gay marriage. It just makes them uncomfortable because it's different and thus weird. It's more of a human response than a religious one.

by **lundie** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:43 am

All marriages must be legal. Is a legal and practical question transformed in a moral, sexual, hypocrite one. Gays must be IN the system, pay taxes, Heritage, etc etc , like everybody. But "God will believers" think that is a sin

by **fiynn** » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:51 am

I am a Christian, but I have the good sense to realize that the best societies are secular (non-religious govt.) ones. otherwise, you get religious govts like all those crazy Islamic ones (Iran, etc.) running everything and being the MORAL police. that sucks.

whatever a Christian approves or disapproves, he should realize that that should not necessarily dominate his political beliefs.

Advertisments:

Useful Links: