With California’s recent legalization of gay marriage, and the potential of other states to recognize a California marriage in their own state, the “debate” about gay marriage’s legality has resurfaced.
I use the term “debate” very loosely since a debate has the connotation of being an intelligent discussion between those of opposing viewpoints. With the “debate” about gay marriage, I tend to hear one side presenting a viewpoint that the constitution guarantees individuals basic rights and equality, while the other side presents “God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” with an occasional spattering of “It will lead to someone marrying their dog”.
Now don’t misunderstand me. Personally, I’m a fan of religion and I’m not here to have a religious debate. If one chooses to maintain a religious standpoint that homosexuality is wrong, that is well within his/her rights. In fact, who am I to tell them that they are wrong?
Additionally, while I would prefer that arguments against gay marriage be presented in a manner that does not break down either when presented to someone who doesn’t share the same religious beliefs, or that does share the same beliefs but also believes in a separation of church and state, my point is not to analyze whether or not morality should be used as a justification against gay marriage, but rather to discuss how flexible the majority of the population is when it comes to their take on morality, except when it comes to gay marriage.
When attacking the idea of gay marriage, the majority of its opponents turn to the Bible. Again, I am not here to debate the Bible, but rather to look at it objectively. There are several passages of the Bible that reference homosexuality, the main passages being in the books of Leviticus, 1 Corinthians, and Romans 1. As a side note, these passages are only found after a thorough reading while, without any type of research, most can quote at least “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, “He who is without sin may cast the first stone”, “But for the grace of God, there go I”, “Whatsoever you do to the least of my brothers, that you do unto me”, “Judge not, lest ye be judged”… but I digress.
Now both Leviticus and Romans 1 are fairly straight forward with passages calling homosexual behavior “detestable”, “indecent”, an “abomination” and a “perversion”. 1 Corinthians, as well, states that “neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God.” So it is apparent that with respect to the Bible, homosexuality is not allowed under any…wait…what’s that? No revilers? No swindlers? No fornicators or drunkards?!?! All listed in the same verse as homosexuals? That doesn’t sound good. Where’s the country’s sense of moral outrage when it comes these other indiscretions? Or are we only outraged at homosexuality because, for the majority of the population, the issue doesn’t affect them personally, while the other activities sound like an enjoyable Friday night.
While we’re at it, in 1968 the Catholic Church, via Pope Paul VI, issued the Humanae Vitae stating that contraception, in any form including the “early withdrawal” method, is morally wrong. I’m assuming that if a law banning the production, sale, and use of contraceptives was placed on a ballot along with a gay marriage ban, the average Catholic would exuberantly vote “yes” for both bans to fulfill his/her moral duty?
Additionally, I don’t believe that you can find a major religion that hasn’t taken a negative stance on the sex industry, so we can throw in a provision banning strip clubs, adult toys, and pornography. No? Then maybe we’re not as concerned with keeping a moral standard as we thought.
What is it then? For the overwhelming majority of us, we don’t have homosexual urges. Add in the fact that, outside the current generation, our upbringing was without exposure to a gay community and referring to someone as “gay” was an accepted insult, and it can be expected that homosexuality is unfamiliar and makes us feel uncomfortable. Therefore, rather than coming to terms with the fact that we have an archaic perspective to overcome, we simply go into hiding behind religion.
But, doesn’t religion deserve better than that? Better than being distorted to provide selective justification for hate, discrimination, and intolerance. Besides, if you can honestly say that the reason that you want to deny a fellow human being the happiness of marrying someone that they love is because it’s what Jesus would want you to do, then you’ve completely missed a fundamental concept.
So, come on. Repeat after me: “The whole gay thing makes me feel uncomfortable.” Now everyone hiding behind religion can come out and do the right thing. “Olly Olly Oxen Free!”
Filed under: Politics, Religion | 5 Comments
Tags: Bible, California, gay, homosexuality, marriage
From the belt buckle of the Bible Belt, allow me to say, “Well done.” I’ve never understood the use of the Bible to ban gay marriage. Paraphrasing Bill Maher, and getting slightly off topic, “With all that’s going on in the world that could lead to our mutual destruction, do we really need to be worrying about boys kissing?”
I’m a straight, happily married man with two children. Now that CA has allowed gay marriage, I’ve not once looked at my wife and thought, “You know, I just don’t love you anymore. But your brother is looking hot these days. You think he’d like to come over and play on our children’s slip and slide with me for a little while?”
It’s all nuts (pardon the pun) and it’s why I chose the moniker “supercynic.” One need only read the headlines and the reactions thereto before one starts needing to take deep breaths and start rubbing their temples.
Please keep up the good writing.
Well, I also must admit that the article was well written, but I disagree on principle.
Yes, I am a Bible toting Right Winger who believes in the scriptures as written. I don’t only feel that homosexuality is wrong, I also accept what it says “neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers”. Yes, that really does leave most of us in a state of accusation, but the whole basis of Christianiy is that only by the grace of God we are saved. I also try to live my life by the principles found between its covers.
I think it shows the moral decay of our country that Christians seem to only take a stand against something that they don’t understand or are uncomfortable with. That is the worst part of the points the article made. We have fallen in our convictions and accepted our own downfall as normal.
Thanks,
Tasha
Tasha — you seem like a person with whom one could have an intelligent debate over this subject unlike most of the “Bible toting Right Winger[s]” that I know. So, please take that as a compliment. However, when you say that you believe “in the scriptures as written,” does that mean that you believe the Bible is monolithic and each book weighs equally in importance as the next? For example, is Obadiah as important as Leviticus? Philemon as important as Psalms?
While we’re at it, can I put to rest the “preserving the sanctity of marriage argument” with the following?
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/on-health-and-money/2008/4/29/marriage-in-sickness-and-for-health-insurance.html
Marriage is, was, and always will be a business deal. I am a fairly religious person, but pretense is not my forte. I’m glad I got married, and in a church, but let’s not kid ourselves.
Don’t even get me started on this subject- the fact that two men (or two women) are allowed to marry each other doesn’t make me value my own marriage any less, or feel that it’s been demeaned in any way.
What right does the government have to regulate the happiness of another? It’s right there in the black and white; “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
I’m glad you feel this way too, though