I cannot imagine another ethical position to take other than supporting our fellow citizens' right to marry. To criminalize love, to deny a portion of our society equal rights under the law, simply because of your fears, prejudices, or religious views, is despicable to me.
I don't see how my marriage is devalued by someone else's. Instead, I feel it is strengthened by the knowledge that the institution is so desirable that gays and lesbians will fight tirelessly against an enormous backlash to have access to it.
Now, I understand that many of us have religious reasons to believe there's something inherently wrong about same-sex marriage (or even same-sex partnerships of any kind). I don't share them. But more than that, I believe our country was founded, not solely on Christian principles, but on the principle of religious freedom. No one religion should get to dictate the actions of our entire nation's people. No religion at all, theoretically, ought to have a say (ahem, separation of Church and State) in matters of law.
If you're a religious authority with a problem marrying homosexuals, fine, don't do it, but why should society as a whole ban the practice because of your beliefs?
Why on Earth would anyone be against it? I honestly want to hear something, anything, that would make the counterargument make the slightest bit of sense to me. If you're against gay marriage, please explain your position. I want to understand how you can look your fellow humans in the eye and tell them they are second-class citizens and unworthy of the same civil rights as yourself.
Subscribe to receive updates from Everyday Ethics or follow us on Twitter!
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Marriage has both civil (civil union) and religious (religious union) traditions.
Any two people should be able to enter into a civil union in this country. Period. A civil union is government construct, and we should not have our government discriminate based upon beliefs.
If a church wants to go out and start "Marriage 2.0" or "Real Marriage (tm)" or "No Gays Marriage" or "We don't like gays and hope they all die and it's a sin Marriage" or even "Yummy brownies served after the ceremony Marriage" and only perform the ritual according to their specific beliefs, then I encourage this. This should be done.
I do not encourage them messing with the civil institution of civil unions (which can be colloquially called "Marriage"). They should execute their cultural beliefs within their culture, and the government should execute its powers and laws according to it's culture (which is one of non-discrimination for things like race, gender, sexual orentiation, etc).
LutheranChik,
Truly, I did not mean to offend you. I, like you, have a set of beliefs that come from my understanding of what the Bible says and what I believe is God's intent. However, it isn't my intent to demean you, wish you harm, want to make you seem inferior, school you, or cause you to give up on what you believe out of futility. My personal position is what it is and is firm, as is yours. Like you, I don't see myself abandoning that. That doesn't mean I don't love you and accept you as one of God's children. I do.
My issue is not whether you and your partner get the perks. That truly is a civil decision. I really meant to limit my comments to my personal beliefs, based on my interpretation of both Old and New Testament scriptures. I happen to be a person who has struggled with unwanted same-sex attraction my entire life and I am not unsympathetic in the least. That's the entire point of my blog. This is a difficult cultural issue for all denominations. While the Lutherans have been splitting on it; Southern Baptists like myself, are still pretty much in agreement. I just believe that while being tempted is not a sin, acting on it -- engaging in homosexual sex -- is. I don't say that to judge, as we are all sinners. I just say it because my reading of God's Word -- and you and I are both Christians -- tells me it is. My role, as a Christian, would be to love sinners; Christ's role would be to open their eyes if need be.
My son is an Army Ranger. Like your partner, he risked and continues to risk his life so that all of us can express ourselves freely. If I hurt you, I apologize.
Thom: This is a free country, and you're free to affiliate with/submit yourself to the authority of any religious organization you wish, even one that makes you ashamed of your God-given sexuality and attempts to force you to make a choice between "holiness," in its perception, and the good gift of sexual intimacy within the context of a committed relationship with a true partner in life. However, it is not your denomination's place -- despite its cultural aggression and seeming need to elect itself America's national church -- to force its sectarian beliefs about sexuality upon a religiously diverse nation, NOR -- and I don't want this to sound mean -- is it your place to advocate against legal marriage for your fellow gays and lesbians because legitimizing your gay sisters' and brothers' committed relationships makes your life harder as a celibate gay person. That would be tantamount to a conservative Muslim man advocating for mandatory women's hijab in this country because seeing women in street clothing makes him personally uncomfortable, or for a "dry" denomination like yours pushing for a renewal of Prohibition because you don't believe in drinking. Short answer: Not. My. Issue. We all work out our own personal integrity issues in a diverse world. My being legally married, or its legal equivalent in terms of rights/privileges/responsibilities (and, yes, one assumes those in a legal marriage as well...this isn't all about entitlements), as Jefferson might have said, neither breaks your leg nor picks your pocket...but you and your coreligionists' denying us these things hurts us financially and socially.
"Children deserve to have a mother and a father for their own development of gender identity." What "gender identity" is that, Thom? "Feminine" girl who plays quietly with Barbie dolls and "masculine" boy who plays noisily with Tonka trucks?
What about the couple who both work in a factory and like to sit together after work, drink beer, watch football, and cuss out the referee? Are their girl children learning the right "gender identity," or do you think they should not be allowed to raise girl children? What about the couple who are both long-haired vegan peaceniks? Are their boy children learning the right "gender identity," or do you think they should not be allowed to raise boy children?
Thing is, gay people will still exist and will still form pair-bonds and will still raise children, whether or not their marriages are made legal and their rights are legally protected. It will just be harder on them. An increase in pain and loss and difficulty is not going to make them stop being gay.
Whether or not you accept your own sexuality, Thom, a growing number of people have decided to accept theirs, and to live by the same standards of loyalty, care and responsibility that should apply to people of all variations in sexuality.
This is not a question of what "normal" and what is "abnormal." It is a question of what force we can rightfully use to make other people live as we consider "normal" and stop them from doing what we consider "abnormal." The one consistent guideline is that whenever allowing the exercise of a right causes more damage than restricting it would cause, we restrict it to the extent necessary to protect the rights of others.
Until someone comes up with a better case than "little girls won't learn to be normal little girls and little boys won't learn to be normal little boys," there is no just reason for restricting the rights of same-sex couples.
Everyone is wanting to talk about what the Bible says about marriage. If the Bible does affirm homosexuality please tell me where. Verse and reference please. If it does not, please tell me where, verse and reference please. I am not looking to discuss any dogmatic references to marriage or Christian Doctrine regarding the sanctity of marriage that may be out there. Put your traditions and "personal beliefs" aside for just a minute. What does the word of God say regarding the issue? I am not asking what it does not say. What do the words penned many thousands of years ago say about marriage?
God did not say that he only loved straight people, he said that he love the world! (John 3:16) I believe God's love is just as goof for me as it is for someone that is homosexual. I am still exploring the issue of homosexual marriage from a biblical and theological standpoint. Respectful help from both sides would be of some assistance. Thanks.
FYI, I am a Christian. I will give more specifics later if anyone is curious.
Thanks.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.