Christians who oppose gay marriage on allegedly religious grounds are fooling themselves. They’re simply reacting to the “ick-factor” and ignoring what the Bible says. Or perhaps they’re being misled by ignorant clergy who are making this mistake.
I was curious what the Bible said about homosexuality, so I googled it, and found a lot of Christian sites with anti-gay Bible quotes. The weakness of the citations was illuminating. The best bits are in Leviticus, among these lovely tidbits:
burning witches
how much to pay for slaves and how to treat them
women must wear hats in the synagogue to avoid tempting the angels
women mustn’t cook for men during their periods
don’t wear mixed-fiber clothing
don’t eat shellfish
Clearly, Christians ignore all of these. What’s special about the admonishment against gay sex?
The very few citations in the New Testament that mention “sodomy” are in wholesale lists of sins. No specific treatments that I found (please correct me if I’m wrong, no doubt there’s one or two that I never saw.) Christ never mentions it.
Christ does mention divorce! It’s forbidden. Christians who were serious about their religion would be against divorce and divorcees, but I don’t hear about any magistrates or judges who refuse to process divorces, or venues who refuse to host a “divorce party” or serve food to divorced people.
Homosexuality isn’t a Christianity issue; it’s a social issue dressed up in vestments. Or am I missing something? If so, please fight my ignorance.
There are a number of Christian religious who are not anti-gay and do support gay marriage and equal rights. I really wish that that concept could gain more traction in the media and in the debate.
The constant battle presented between gays and Christians is manufactured by bigoted Christians claiming a much larger presence than they are entitled to.
What really gets me is when Christians base their anti-gay attitudes on the story of Sodom and Gomorrah. What does it say about you when you read a story involving attempted homosexual gang rape (of strangers entitled to hospitality) and think that it’s the homosexual element that’s the bad part?
A person of ANY organized religious flavor who opposes gay people marrying each other falls into 1 of 2 classifications, with the ability to occupy both as well:
I was listening, just a few hours ago, to a Bible radio broadcast, talking about how the bakers in Oregon had been “Compelled to take part in a lesbian wedding.”
So…these guys hate their own God so much they’ll walk all over the part about “Thou shalt not bear false witness.” That’s just sad.
I’m guessing you’d rather just bash Christians than have a true discussion, but you must know that the Old Testament laws were a contract between God and the Isrealites. Christians are under no obligation to follow any of those laws.
Orthadox Christianity says that Jesus is God, and the Bible is God’s word. Ergo, everything the Bible says about any subject is what Jesus said about it, not just the direct quotes.
Yes, Christians should look at divorce the same as same sex marriage. However, inconsistency is not an argument against the rightness or wrongness of something. It’s just a fancy ad hominem.
Can you explain what you mean by bigot? And by what standards is it wrong?
True, but they always seem to list adultery first and also have a lot to say about divorce, I don’t see the RW Christians getting up in arms about these sins. Hell, they loved Newt and McCain but for some reason they think Obama is the devil incarnate even though he is a good, Christian, family man. Must be something different than religion that motivates them.
Re: the “ick” factor, here’s an experiment: go down to Walmart and have a good look around. You’ll find worse scenarios.
If it’s only OK to have sex in marriage then Christians should be pro-gay marriage. Unless they want gay people to never have gay sex, which is mostly the case. Some Christians think homosexuality is something you do, not something you are, which may be true in some instances but isn’t generally applicable. An alternative is for gay people to pretend to be straight and fool some poor straight person into a passionless marriage. That doesn’t seem particularly ethical. I guess gay people should all become celibate monks. Or priests. Oh wait.
If the discussion goes on long enough someone will make a comparison to pedophiles. They don’t choose to act that way either, but they shouldn’t. That doesn’t tend to go over very well. Either way, apparently God is making a lot of mistakes.
Nice strawman / ad hominem combo there. I know many Christians who feel as strongly about divorce or adultery among other things. However, no one is getting sued for not making a divorce cake, so it doesn’t make the news.
There also needs to be a distinction made, especially as it relates to politics. Like many groups, there are social Christians who claim the label based on occasional visit to a church or what label their parents had. Then there are religious Christians who attempt to follow Jesus and the teachings of the Bible. I speak for the second group.
The orthodox Christian view is just because someone has desires, that doesn’t make them right to follow through. Hence the belief that sex is intended only for a man and woman who are married.
What is wrong with celibacy for someone with same sex attractions? A Christian should restrain themselves from lots of natural desires and actions. I shouldn’t punch the guy who makes a rude gesture toward me. I shouldn’t dog whistle at the attractive lady walking down the street. I shouldn’t take things that don’t belong to me, even if I really like them.
Can you define the mistakes God made? I don’t understand how that follows.
I’ve always disliked that aphorism, as there are definitely exceptions. My papa told me lots of dumb things he believed – compasses point north because of huge veins of lodestone in northern Canada, for instance. I was easily reasoned out of this position, by dint of superior evidence otherwise, and, learning the truth, was able to reason him out of that position.
It is possible to reason against faith; it happens just often enough to provide us with hope. But, yes, faith does offer a kind of “curb” or “potential well” that reason must overcome.
But the point is still valid. Many of the stalwarts of religious and social conservatives have engaged in activities that seem to be just as verboten as gay marriage/sexual relationships, but that’s always given a pass. When have we ever heard Newt condemned by religious organizations for his treatment of his heterosexual marriage?
The fact is, the sheer volume of hypocrisy makes it hard to take any of it seriously.