Someone justify banning gay marriage to me

[Aufan59 80]

I would like someone to form an argument that justifies the banning of gay marriage.

The only argument is that the Bible says no.

The Bible is classified under "Church."

Banning gay marriage is classified under "State."

If we are using "Church" to deiced what the "State" does then we are clearly not separating church and state.

As far as the state is concerned, a gay person is still a person, with every right everyone else has. The church comes in and says that they don't have the right to get married. The STATE then uses the CHURCH'S verdict to say that a gay person cannot get married.

How is this constitutional?

[Ranger12 46]

The Bible also says "Thou shalt not murder". So going by what you just said, should we legalize murder just because the Bible says we should not do it? As far as marriage is concerned, that was a spiritual thing long before it was ever a legal, or as you say it, a "state" thing.

However, let's just leave out religion on the matter. Let's look at science. Same sex marriages physically do not make sense. If you want to believe in evolution and not creation, even evolution tells you that there was a reason for male and female relations. Same sex relationships just is not natural....nothing complicated about that is it?

I don't hate those that live the homosexual lifestyle, I just don't agree with the lifestyle they are living. The PC crowd wants to call me "intolerate" or "homophobic" because of the way I believe. Funny how the PC crowd likes to fight stereotypes, but sure are quick to label people that don't agree with them. I have worked with a few people that choose that lifestyle and I got along great with them. I treated them just the same as I did with the straight people I worked with. Heck, they were actually nicer and much easier to work with then many heterosexuals. Unfortunately, there are too many, especially so called Christians, that want to be very condemning and look down at homosexuals. Too much venom comes out of their mouth instead of the love of Christ.

I know that personally for me, and many other people, marriage still is more of a spiritual issue then it is a legal issue. We believe it is a holy union between a man and woman and the state has not right to change the definition of it. When it comes to civil unions, I am not sure if I am against that or not. Even though I don't agree with the lifestyle, I also think this country was founded on the freedom that would allow two consenting adults the freedom to do that. I believe our country was founded upon Christian principles, but also our Founding Fathers did make laws that prevented the oppression of those that did not believe as even they believed.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Justify banning brother/sister marriage

Justifiy banning father/daughter or mother /son marriage.

Don't bring your value judgements down on me. You have no right to tell others how to live their lives, right ?

Justify banning person/animal marriage.

See where this leads to ?

[OldNewby 27]

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

The Founders wanted to make sure, unlike England, that there was NOT just one official (state) religion. In America, people have the right to exercise the religion of their choice - even the right to exercise no religion at all, if they so choose. I say it is unconstitutional for the government to prohibit the free exercise of a religion by telling its members what they can believe and what they cannot believe. If the state attempts to change the definition and long established tradition of marriage, it is stepping into the realm of religion. The 1st Amendment prohibits this intrusion.

[arnaldoabru 11]

The Bible also says "Thou shalt not murder". So going by what you just said, should we legalize murder just because the Bible says we should not do it? As far as marriage is concerned, that was a spiritual thing long before it was ever a legal, or as you say it, a "state" thing.

However, let's just leave out religion on the matter. Let's look at science. Same sex marriages physically do not make sense. If you want to believe in evolution and not creation, even evolution tells you that there was a reason for male and female relations. Same sex relationships just is not natural....nothing complicated about that is it?

I don't hate those that live the homosexual lifestyle, I just don't agree with the lifestyle they are living. The PC crowd wants to call me "intolerate" or "homophobic" because of the way I believe. Funny how the PC crowd likes to fight stereotypes, but sure are quick to label people that don't agree with them. I have worked with a few people that choose that lifestyle and I got along great with them. I treated them just the same as I did with the straight people I worked with. Heck, they were actually nicer and much easier to work with then many heterosexuals. Unfortunately, there are too many, especially so called Christians, that want to be very condemning and look down at homosexuals. Too much venom comes out of their mouth instead of the love of Christ.

I know that personally for me, and many other people, marriage still is more of a spiritual issue then it is a legal issue. We believe it is a holy union between a man and woman and the state has not right to change the definition of it. When it comes to civil unions, I am not sure if I am against that or not. Even though I don't agree with the lifestyle, I also think this country was founded on the freedom that would allow two consenting adults the freedom to do that. I believe our country was founded upon Christian principles, but also our Founding Fathers did make laws that prevented the oppression of those that did not believe as even they believed.

Good post Ranger.Don't we though make it a legal issue when we have to obtain a marriage liscense though?

[RunInRed 16,489]

Civil Unions. It's about equal rights.

[jared52 4,354]

If we are using "Church" to deiced what the "State" does then we are clearly not separating church and state.

Where did this concept come from? It's found nowhere in our constitution.

Civil Unions. It's about equal rights.

What rights do gay people who live together not have?

[RunInRed 16,489]

If we are using "Church" to deiced what the "State" does then we are clearly not separating church and state.

Where did this concept come from? It's found nowhere in our constitution.

Civil Unions. It's about equal rights.

What rights do gay people who live together not have?

Well depending on the state, some don't have access to certain kinds of healthcare coverage, qualify for marriage/household tax exemptions/deductions, etc.

[Aufan59 80]

The Bible also says "Thou shalt not murder". So going by what you just said, should we legalize murder just because the Bible says we should not do it? As far as marriage is concerned, that was a spiritual thing long before it was ever a legal, or as you say it, a "state" thing.

Harming other people is common sense to make illegal. Consenting adults don't harm other people. My stance isn't "it is in the bible so we should do the opposite." People who don't agree with the bible aren't on an anti-bible crusade and want us to do everything the bible says not to do. There is a reason we allow people to work on the sabbath, because we realize the bible is outdated relevant to everyday life.

However, let's just leave out religion on the matter. Let's look at science. Same sex marriages physically do not make sense. If you want to believe in evolution and not creation, even evolution tells you that there was a reason for male and female relations. Same sex relationships just is not natural....nothing complicated about that is it?

Why aren't organ transplants banned? Putting someone else's organ inside of you isn't natural at all. All food items, drugs, any technology would have to be banned because its all not natural.

Where are the people whining about people with dyed hair? Looks to me like that is pretty unnatural, thus should be illegal.

We believe it is a holy union between a man and woman and the state has not right to change the definition of it.

It is defined by the Church, thus the state should have nothing to do with it. I don't get why that is so hard to understand. Either it is a state affair, or a church affair. The unconstitutional part is that we say it is both a state and church affair.

[auwallace 6]

There are non-christian weddings that happen everyday. Atheists, Pagans, etc. I've never heard any uproar about these marriages. I guess i just don't understand what right i have to tell two people they can't get married. Also, why should i care? I'm not a gay rights activist in the least, i think it's gross, un-natural, and immoral. But I also think its none of my business.

[jared52 4,354]

Well depending on the state, some don't have access to certain kinds of healthcare coverage, qualify for marriage/household tax exemptions/deductions, etc.

Can you show me in the constitution where those things are rights?

[DKW 86 7,441]

Another Angle: Say we do allow Man-Man Woman-Woman Marriage, when you take into account some of the state laws regarding age of consent to marry, you could easily have 14 year old boys marrying 60 year old men. Ruth Bader Ginsburg, US Supreme Court justice wrote her support for dropping the age of sexual consent to 12 nationwide. What about other laws limiting marriage between whatever you want to talk about? Men and dogs, etc. Is there not something far more pressing to worry about?

I basically do not care what the gay folks do. They can take advantage of Civil Unions etc. I know of 2 gay couples here in Decatur. They could not care less about gay marriage. Why do the national activists seem so intent on dragging them along with them on something they do not care about?

At some point you have to ask why this even matters. My answer is again like BG has said. Activists will not stop until we are not only allowing gay marriage but are accepting and supporting it as well. There is a certain ram it down your throat to this discussion.

I also plainly see that marraiage outside of religion is in no way sacred. A courthouse marriage is a sacred thing? Puh-lease!

Give them liberal laws for Civil Unions and let it go. Why expend the political capital needed for this one? What is in it in the long run? Shoving it down half or better of the citizens' throats will only make it worse.

[RunInRed 16,489]

Well depending on the state, some don't have access to certain kinds of healthcare coverage, qualify for marriage/household tax exemptions/deductions, etc.

Can you show me in the constitution where those things are rights?

It's about equal access. IMO it's not very American to give basic rights/benefits to one group without the other. It's the same philosophy that was behind the civil rights movements, the womens right to vote movement, etc. If you truly want to live in a country with "equality and justice for all" then I don't see how you can't support civil unions.

A bunch of you are making arguments around how you define marriage and personally, I don't think that is the issue. The real question is on rights/benefits and therefore I think civil unions make sense.

FYI

"According to the federal government's General Accounting Office (GAO), more than 1,100 rights and protections are conferred to U.S. citizens upon marriage. Areas affected include Social Security benefits, veterans' benefits, health insurance, Medicaid, hospital visitation, estate taxes, retirement savings, pensions, family leave, and immigration law."

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0922609.html

[AUslug 1]

I agree with DKW and Ranger on this issue, I'm also disturbed by this "cram it down your throat" message that some proponents are using.

[arnaldoabru 11]

They can't reproduce,so what does it matter.Kind of like the Shakers

[Defense(clap clap) 4]

I don't understand how someone can view a lifestyle that's not a choice as wrong or immoral. Why would anyone make a choice to be discriminated against?

I totally agree with runinred. One of the main things is the legal benefits of being "married." The fact is that since the govt won't allow it, they don't get the same benefits as a man and a woman. I guarantee you that the majority of gay people don't care what you call it - marriage, civil union, etc. - they just want the same rights as straight people. It's unAmerican to deny them those rights.

My fiance's uncle has been in a relationship with another man for almost 6 years now. He was actually married to a woman at one point in his life. He got to the point where he was having male fantasies and just not physically attracted to women anymore and realized he was gay. It's not like he woke up one day and said - you know, I think I'm gonna be gay now. He's a wonderful person and more of a father to my fiance than her actual father. It blows my mind that anyone would want to withhold these rights to gay people.

She went to college with a guy who's a priest now and the one thing he told her, in regards to gay marriage, that really made me have loads of respect for him was this - I'd rather be turned away from heaven by having arms too open than arms too closed.

[otterinbham 0]

I'll use my classic response. Show me how this is the government's business. If it's between two consenting adults, it's not in my book.

On to other examples that have been thrown on this thread:

Adults marrying children. There's an age of consent. So there goes that argument.

People marrying animals. Are you kidding me?

Marriage intended for reproduction. What about childless couples?

Murder, theft, and rape being banned in the Bible, so legalizing gay marriage means legalizing those actions. A ridiculous statement, since those actions cause harm to others, while this is a consensual act between two adults.

The truth is, I really don't understand the lifestyle. Yet, if you adhere to the notion of government staying out of people's lives, then that means staying out of people's lives. After all, under the laws of many states, the old sodomy laws outlawed any sex that wasn't reproductive in nature. Use your own imagination as to what that would entail.

[bojack34 2]

I don't understand how someone can view a lifestyle that's not a choice as wrong or immoral. Why would anyone make a choice to be discriminated against?

I totally agree with runinred. One of the main things is the legal benefits of being "married." The fact is that since the govt won't allow it, they don't get the same benefits as a man and a woman. I guarantee you that the majority of gay people don't care what you call it - marriage, civil union, etc. - they just want the same rights as straight people. It's unAmerican to deny them those rights.

My fiance's uncle has been in a relationship with another man for almost 6 years now. He was actually married to a woman at one point in his life. He got to the point where he was having male fantasies and just not physically attracted to women anymore and realized he was gay. It's not like he woke up one day and said - you know, I think I'm gonna be gay now. He's a wonderful person and more of a father to my fiance than her actual father. It blows my mind that anyone would want to withhold these rights to gay people.

She went to college with a guy who's a priest now and the one thing he told her, in regards to gay marriage, that really made me have loads of respect for him was this - I'd rather be turned away from heaven by having arms too open than arms too closed.

I don't understand how somebody who is born a drunk or child molester or a murder etc should be discriminated against. See how crazy that sounds. I don't believe in discriminating against anyone for any lifestyle and yes there are plenty of gay people out there that are decent human beings. If they don't want anyone butting into their personal lives maybe they should stay off the streets with their gay pride marches. Why so much sympathy for the homosexuals but not for the drunkards and thieves etc. Nobody should be discriminated against. We should love the homosexual just as much as we love the drunkard but I don't believe in enabling them either.

[auwallace 6]

I don't understand how someone can view a lifestyle that's not a choice as wrong or immoral. Why would anyone make a choice to be discriminated against?

I totally agree with runinred. One of the main things is the legal benefits of being "married." The fact is that since the govt won't allow it, they don't get the same benefits as a man and a woman. I guarantee you that the majority of gay people don't care what you call it - marriage, civil union, etc. - they just want the same rights as straight people. It's unAmerican to deny them those rights.

My fiance's uncle has been in a relationship with another man for almost 6 years now. He was actually married to a woman at one point in his life. He got to the point where he was having male fantasies and just not physically attracted to women anymore and realized he was gay. It's not like he woke up one day and said - you know, I think I'm gonna be gay now. He's a wonderful person and more of a father to my fiance than her actual father. It blows my mind that anyone would want to withhold these rights to gay people.

She went to college with a guy who's a priest now and the one thing he told her, in regards to gay marriage, that really made me have loads of respect for him was this - I'd rather be turned away from heaven by having arms too open than arms too closed.

I don't understand how somebody who is born a drunk or child molester or a murder etc should be discriminated against. See how crazy that sounds. I don't believe in discriminating against anyone for any lifestyle and yes there are plenty of gay people out there that are decent human beings. If they don't want anyone butting into their personal lives maybe they should stay off the streets with their gay pride marches. Why so much sympathy for the homosexuals but not for the drunkards and thieves etc. Nobody should be discriminated against. We should love the homosexual just as much as we love the drunkard but I don't believe in enabling them either.

Because homosexuality isn't against the law and doesn't harm anyone. By casting them in the same light as drunks, murderers, and child molesters I can see your disdain for it. I don't like it, i think its a sin, and i think its gross but again its also none of my business. I myself am not a holy enough person to judge someone elses lifestyle and decide what they can and can't do. I will be honest about my opinions but I will leave the ultimate judgement to God.Give them civil unions and equal rights. Drunks, child molesters, and murderers harm and kill people, Gays dress really well and take care of their yards.

[Aufan59 80]

I don't understand how somebody who is born a drunk or child molester or a murder etc should be discriminated against.

Because they HARM OTHER PEOPLE.

How hard is that to understand?

[Aufan59 80]

Well depending on the state, some don't have access to certain kinds of healthcare coverage, qualify for marriage/household tax exemptions/deductions, etc.

Can you show me in the constitution where those things are rights?

Being treated the same as every other human being is a right. Imagine if interracial couples didn't get the same privileges. Even that is a choice, but it would be ridiculous to discriminate against it.

[Aufan59 80]

They can't reproduce,so what does it matter.Kind of like the Shakers

Plenty of married couples can't reproduce. I guess we should get fertility tests before marriage or else it should be illegal to get married.

[BZ770 2]

Because homosexuality isn't against the law and doesn't harm anyone. By casting them in the same light as drunks, murderers, and child molesters I can see your disdain for it. I don't like it, i think its a sin, and i think its gross but again its also none of my business. I myself am not a holy enough person to judge someone elses lifestyle and decide what they can and can't do. I will be honest about my opinions but I will leave the ultimate judgement to God.Give them civil unions and equal rights. Drunks, child molesters, and murderers harm and kill people, Gays dress really well and take care of their yards.

Last time I checked Sodomy is against the Law in the State of Alabama. This was used as an argument to stop a gay rights parade in Tuscaloosa about 12 years ago.

[arnaldoabru 11]

They can't reproduce,so what does it matter.Kind of like the Shakers

Plenty of married couples can't reproduce. I guess we should get fertility tests before marriage or else it should be illegal to get married.

I was kidding

[bojack34 2]

I don't understand how somebody who is born a drunk or child molester or a murder etc should be discriminated against.

Because they HARM OTHER PEOPLE.

How hard is that to understand?

Having something rammed up your rectum sounds pretty painful to me. I am not talking about just the physical nature of harm but the emotional nature of it. People are going to choose the homosexual lifestyle no matter what kind of laws our government puts into effect. The ten commandments were a law and people still broke them and people will continue to break them. Why make a law permitting homosexuality. Why we are at it lets just make a law permitting rape. Why? Well according to some peoples beliefs the rapist was born that way and he can't help it. The one whom was raped was born and predestined to be raped. Again, I don't believe that but their a lot of people out their whom believe we are born with a genetic defect and it is used to excuse all sorts of sinful behavior. We were all born with one genetic defect and that is SIN. But glory be to God that by the blood and power of Jesus Christ we can all be free and forgiven of our past sins. It is my prayer that all people choose to be washed in the blood of the Lamb. Regardless I will continue to love the sinner and saints equally.