Christians, Tell Me Why I Should Oppose Gay Marriage (behavior, perspective, anti-gay)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
We had this exact same conversation with this exact same poster (under a different moniker)
In one sense, and one sense only, I agree with our Moderator cut: edit buddy stargazzer. Homosexuality should not be legally restricted or discriminated against in any way, and we should treat all all health risks through a combination of research and education. All people, gay and straight, need to understand the risks of specific sexual behavior, what steps can be taken, and the relative effectiveness of those steps. Foolishly, I thought this was what we were supposed to be teaching our children starting at about the 6th grade in Sex Ed. Oh Well...
For the Christians here that are opposed to Gay Marriage, I would like you to tell me why everyone should also oppose it, for valid reasons OTHER than religion. I just dont see your point. What does it hurt to let two people of the same sex get married? How does it have a negative impact on you as a Christian, on me, or society as a whole?
Marriage isn't only a religious institution, but also a gov't institution. So in otherwords, this should be a non issue considering that in this country, we have a separation of church and state and no religious doctrine or beliefs should have an impact on the laws of the gov't. I could see why you may fight it if getting married meant that you had to do it in a church, or have a religious ceremony but that isn't the case. So, if you are a Christian that opposes gay marriage, dont marry someone of the same sex. Simple right? Surely you recognize that not everyone is Christian, or is it your argument that marriage is ONLY a Christian institution and should be reserved only for Christians? Also, make sure that it stays out of YOUR church and doesn't impose on your first ammendment rights, but really, what would be wrong with the state recognizing that two people of the same sex are married?
You have the floor.......
Okay, I can break it down for you.
Let's start with some of the things you have stated first.
Quote:
we have a separation of church and state and no religious doctrine or beliefs should have an impact on the laws of the gov't
Do you know what this means? I mean do you really know what this means. Separation of church and state is not meant in the context that you are interpreting it as. The point is religion plays a huge role in politics today. Why do you think people care about whether President Obama is a Muslim or a Christian if church and state is truly separate? The idea of the separation of church and state deals with not having one religion rule over our country, BUT that doesn't mean that religion cannot influence decisions. The bottom line is, your morality is directly tied to what you believe. No matter what you religion is, you determine what is right or wrong based on what you believe and that is how people vote and how leaders run this country.
For example, if a political leader in Utah wanted to make polygamy illegal, he would probably face a strong opposition from Mormons, but if he proposed the same law in a place that has a strong Christian base like Texas, for instance, then he would probably garner more support. To Mormons it may be okay, but to Christians it may not be. People are going to support or not support something like that based on what they believe. There is no way infringing one religion over another, but that is just the way we as human beings determine what is right or wrong.
Quote:
what would be wrong with the state recognizing that two people of the same sex are married?
It goes back to my first statement. It contradicts what I believe to be right for starters. Second, it is much more than just marriage. Same sex couples want to be able to adopt, to have homosexuality taught in schools as well as so many other things other than just marriage.
Now to answer your main point, to break this down in a way that does not necessarily include the Bible. Look at the arguments that are made about homosexuality.
It's two consenting adults.
It doesn't harm you.
Studies show gay couples stay together longer.
Now let's put like this, the same statements can be used to justify incest, polygamy and even bestiality. I know some people don't like those things being brought up, but what would be your argument if the people who support incest used these same statements. How could you argue with them that incest is wrong? How do we know that incest is wrong?
It goes back to my first point, what do we base our truth of what is right or wrong on? You can't just say something is right or wrong just because. It has to have a foundation. To say gay marriage is right because these are two consenting adults can lead to so others using the same argument so is that really and truly a valid argument?
There is also this assumption that homosexuality is a biological occurrence. The issue is that that has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. They do not have a root cause of homosexuality, they don't know where it is in the body and they don't even know if it is even some that is 'curable'. Many assume that it is biological and so they interpret being against homosexuality like being against race. Well there is very little connection between the two. Unless there is stone cold, irrefutable evidence to prove homosexuality is indeed biological, it should not be treated as something that cannot be changed. If we used that understanding then we would realize that the reality is that everyone is capable of marrying in this country, but you have to meet certain provisions. You have to be of a certain age, in most states you have to not be related, and you also have to marry someone of the opposite sex. That is something that applies to everyone. The issue is gay do not see their 'lifestyle' as something that can change so that is why they do not believe it is fair, but again I will ask, how can that argument be used when the biological occurrence of homosexuality has never been proven?
Gay male anal sex always seems to be the focus of people obsessed with demonizing gay people.
Interesting, considering that 43.5% of straight males and 36% of straight females engage in anal sex according to the National Health Statistics Report based on data from the 2006-2008 National Family Growth Survey on the CDC website.
That would be FAR more straight people ( in raw numbers)engaging in anal sex than there are gay males.
And to take it one step further, it would be interesting to know what percentage of the gay community engages in anal sex. Unfortunately the site you linked does not specify (or if it does, I can't find it). I'd wager that it is similar to that of the straight community. If its higher, it isn't much higher. The notion that all gay men enjoy anal sex is a false one; many men find it uncomfortable, painful, dirty or otherwise unpleasant. Sure, its kinky and hot but not everyone does it.
Let's start with some of the things you have stated first.
Do you know what this means? I mean do you really know what this means. Separation of church and state is not meant in the context that you are interpreting it as. The point is religion plays a huge role in politics today. Why do you think people care about whether President Obama is a Muslim or a Christian if church and state is truly separate? The idea of the separation of church and state deals with not having one religion rule over our country, BUT that doesn't mean that religion cannot influence decisions. The bottom line is, your morality is directly tied to what you believe. No matter what you religion is, you determine what is right or wrong based on what you believe and that is how people vote and how leaders run this country.
For example, if a political leader in Utah wanted to make polygamy illegal, he would probably face a strong opposition from Mormons, but if he proposed the same law in a place that has a strong Christian base like Texas, for instance, then he would probably garner more support. To Mormons it may be okay, but to Christians it may not be. People are going to support or not support something like that based on what they believe. There is no way infringing one religion over another, but that is just the way we as human beings determine what is right or wrong.
It goes back to my first statement. It contradicts what I believe to be right for starters. Second, it is much more than just marriage. Same sex couples want to be able to adopt, to have homosexuality taught in schools as well as so many other things other than just marriage.
Now to answer your main point, to break this down in a way that does not necessarily include the Bible. Look at the arguments that are made about homosexuality.
It's two consenting adults. It doesn't harm you. Studies show gay couples stay together longer.
Now let's put like this, the same statements can be used to justify incest, polygamy and even bestiality. I know some people don't like those things being brought up, but what would be your argument if the people who support incest used these same statements. How could you argue with them that incest is wrong? How do we know that incest is wrong?
It goes back to my first point, what do we base our truth of what is right or wrong on? You can't just say something is right or wrong just because. It has to have a foundation. To say gay marriage is right because these are two consenting adults can lead to so others using the same argument so is that really and truly a valid argument?
There is also this assumption that homosexuality is a biological occurrence. The issue is that that has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. They do not have a root cause of homosexuality, they don't know where it is in the body and they don't even know if it is even some that is 'curable'. Many assume that it is biological and so they interpret being against homosexuality like being against race. Well there is very little connection between the two. Unless there is stone cold, irrefutable evidence to prove homosexuality is indeed biological, it should not be treated as something that cannot be changed. If we used that understanding then we would realize that the reality is that everyone is capable of marrying in this country, but you have to meet certain provisions. You have to be of a certain age, in most states you have to not be related, and you also have to marry someone of the opposite sex. That is something that applies to everyone. The issue is gay do not see their 'lifestyle' as something that can change so that is why they do not believe it is fair, but again I will ask, how can that argument be used when the biological occurrence of homosexuality has never been proven?
Royal College of Psychiatrists:
"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment."
"There's a converging line of evidence between the hormonal studies, the genetic studies , and the neuroanatomical studies. My research has identified candidate genes within these new chromosomal regions that could link together all of these different findings”
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb.
However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation
Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.
The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.
The differences are likely to have been forged in the womb or in early infancy, says Ivanka Savic, who conducted the study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.
"This is the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects," she says.
Previous studies have also shown differences in brain architecture and activity between gay and straight people, but most relied on people's responses to sexuality driven cues that could have been learned, such as rating the attractiveness of male or female faces.
Brain symmetry
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.
"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.
"This study demonstrates that homosexuals of both sexes show strong cross-sex shifts in brain symmetry," says Qazi Rahman, a leading researcher on sexual orientation at Queen Mary college, University of London, UK.
"The connectivity differences reported in the amygdala are striking."
"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores," says Simon LeVay, a prominent US author who in 1991 reported finding differences(pdf) in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus between straight and gay men.
And to take it one step further, it would be interesting to know what percentage of the gay community engages in anal sex. Unfortunately the site you linked does not specify (or if it does, I can't find it). I'd wager that it is similar to that of the straight community. If its higher, it isn't much higher. The notion that all gay men enjoy anal sex is a false one; many men find it uncomfortable, painful, dirty or otherwise unpleasant. Sure, its kinky and hot but not everyone does it.
From what I've read it's probably somewhere around 60%.
My main point though, is the artificial and hypocritical focus on SEX ACTS!!!!!, while ignoring the fact that gay and lesbian people lead varied and full lives just as straight people do. Who on earth would go around only talking about the whole range of heterosexual sex acts, and nothing else, with every straight person they met?
"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment."
"There's a converging line of evidence between the hormonal studies, the genetic studies , and the neuroanatomical studies. My research has identified candidate genes within these new chromosomal regions that could link together all of these different findings”
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb.
However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation
Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.
The scans reveal that in gay people, key structures of the brain governing emotion, mood, anxiety and aggressiveness resemble those in straight people of the opposite sex.
The differences are likely to have been forged in the womb or in early infancy, says Ivanka Savic, who conducted the study at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden.
"This is the most robust measure so far of cerebral differences between homosexual and heterosexual subjects," she says.
Previous studies have also shown differences in brain architecture and activity between gay and straight people, but most relied on people's responses to sexuality driven cues that could have been learned, such as rating the attractiveness of male or female faces.
Brain symmetry
To get round this, Savic and her colleague, Per Lindström, chose to measure brain parameters likely to have been fixed at birth.
"That was the whole point of the study, to show parameters that differ, but which couldn't be altered by learning or cognitive processes," says Savic.
"This study demonstrates that homosexuals of both sexes show strong cross-sex shifts in brain symmetry," says Qazi Rahman, a leading researcher on sexual orientation at Queen Mary college, University of London, UK.
"The connectivity differences reported in the amygdala are striking."
"Paradoxically, it's more informative to look at things that have no direct connection with sexual orientation, and that's where this study scores," says Simon LeVay, a prominent US author who in 1991 reported finding differences(pdf) in a part of the brain called the hypothalamus between straight and gay men.
Those studies contradict the notion that someone can be bisexual. If a decision is made that they would either have the sexual orientation of a male or female, then how is it possible for people to be bisexual?
There is also this assumption that homosexuality is a biological occurrence. The issue is that that has never been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt. They do not have a root cause of homosexuality, they don't know where it is in the body and they don't even know if it is even some that is 'curable'. Many assume that it is biological and so they interpret being against homosexuality like being against race. Well there is very little connection between the two. Unless there is stone cold, irrefutable evidence to prove homosexuality is indeed biological, it should not be treated as something that cannot be changed. If we used that understanding then we would realize that the reality is that everyone is capable of marrying in this country, but you have to meet certain provisions. You have to be of a certain age, in most states you have to not be related, and you also have to marry someone of the opposite sex. That is something that applies to everyone. The issue is gay do not see their 'lifestyle' as something that can change so that is why they do not believe it is fair, but again I will ask, how can that argument be used when the biological occurrence of homosexuality has never been proven?
Those studies contradict the notion that someone can be bisexual. If a decision is made that they would either have the sexual orientation of a male or female, then how is it possible for people to be bisexual?
What? Of course they don't.
I don't think you understand what sexual orientation is. Read up on the Kinsey Scale.
A scale on how heterosexual or homosexual someone is? And you believe this mess? So I guess by that logic you believe bisexuals should be able to polygamist right?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
