Brief thoughts on the latest “same-sex marriage” issues

A commenter on another blog repeated the claim that:

Same-sex marriage opponents, however, are arguing that marriage should be “limited to just us.” They frequently argue, as you do, that the law should be used to force other people to live according to their religious beliefs.

Some fictions never seem to die.  What supporters of traditional marriage typically argue is as follows:

  • “Same-sex marriage” is as logical as a square circle (“the same sex union of a man and a woman”).  That’s really all you need, but there is more.
  • These unions do not by nature or design produce the next generation.  (The typical response about infertile couples fails on several levels, such as that the government is not omniscient about such things and adoption is always possible.  Exceptions make bad rules.)
  • These unions can never provide a mother and a father to a child.  Never.  (This also addresses the “What about infertile couples” question.)
  • The same rationale used for “same-sex marriage” would also justify marriages involving polygamy, incest or bestiality.  And don’t say, “That could never happen.”  Did you predict twenty years ago that the Left would want to teach kindergarteners about “same-sex marriage?”

Therefore, while the relationships are legal and gays are free to love as they see fit, there is no reason for the government to endorse or affirm these relationships.  You could only claim that we were trying to force others to live according to our beliefs if we prevented the relationships completely (i.e., Middle Eastern Islam).

There is nothing unequal about only recognizing marriage between a man and a woman.  It is the only logical position to take.  Anyone holding an opposing view is either advancing the homosexual agenda or they have been fooled by it.

Total number of Bible verses used in those arguments?  Zero.  The claim of the Left is based on anti-religious bigotry and trades on the general lack of critical thinking in our culture.

The main religious issue is how legalized “same sex marriage” will infringe upon religious freedoms.  Despite the lies of the Left, this is a real threat and we’ve seen examples around the world and in the U.S. already.

[T]he widely respected UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, who favors same-sex marriage, took time out to acknowledge that the religious liberty implications of same-sex marriage are not “scaremongering.”

Of course, if anyone wants to know what the one true God says about homosexual behavior He was very clear:

  • 100% of the Bible verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referencing God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

P.S. Who would have thought that Rick Warren would do a well documented flip-flop on Prop 8 and that the Osteens would (sort of) stand up for traditional marriage?  As a commenter there pointed out, Joel should have made it clear that one man / one woman marriage wasn’t God’s “best,” it was his only.  But he is a couple steps ahead of Warren.

0 thoughts on “Brief thoughts on the latest “same-sex marriage” issues”

  1. Good post. I have recently discovered some very scary sites that try and use the Word to justify same-sex marriages. It is a total corruption of the scripture.

    Like

  2. Caution! We are relying on the media (any media) to give us a truthful rendition of what, for instance, Rick Warren did or did not say. (Keep in mind I am very much NOT a Rick Warren fan.) In reviewing a variety of sources, there seems to be a disagreement about exactly what was said and meant. Here is a link to a response to Warren’s appearance on Larry King Live that was intended to clarify.

    http://www.cbn.com/CBNnews/577459.aspx

    I’m not sure we’re getting the real information here.

    Like

  3. as you know, we have a little one here in the home and we still get Parents magazine – which interestingly…

    Page 108 of the December 2008 edition says:

    Encourage Daddy time. The greatest untapped resource available for improving the lives of our children is time with Dad — early and often

    As soon as I read this, I thought – what do lesbian couples do? What do they say to this? Over and over we hear the importance of a daddy and a mommy.

    Like

  4. The same rationale used for “same-sex marriage” would also justify marriages involving polygamy, incest or bestiality.

    This is wrong. First I want to point out that polygamy has only helped certain societies throughout history, so hey, let’s get that back onboard ASAP. Secondly, incest and homosexuality are completely incomparable; nice strawman though. And lastly, bestiality? Really? You’re really going to play that card? Tell me, then, how legalizing gay marriage across America somehow quietly condones having sex with animals. Seriously, I’m interested to see where you’re connecting the dots.

    Like

  5. John, I’ll let the IRS know you aren’t paying taxes. You don’t understand what “equal” means. You get the same protection as straights.

    Fox, the advocates of the homosexual agenda fail on multiple levels when pushing oxymoronic “same sex marriage.” Here are a couple, and why my argument isn’t a straw man at all.

    If you are radically changing the definition of marriage to “one man and one woman or two men or two women,” then you are hateful bigots for pulling up the drawbridge for those who want to marry multiple people or animals. Who are you to say anything is wrong with that?

    But what the rationale for SSM really says is that you want to change the definition of marriage to “not just a union of a man and a woman.” That immediately opens the door to define it any way someone wants. Why just permit your preferred change?

    Like

  6. Don’t forget that the issue of same-sex marriage isn’t at all about equality. Straights have the same limitations / freedoms on who they can and can’t marry as gays have – ie. neither can marry someone of the same sex but both can marry anyone of the opposite sex.

    Oh, and Neil wasn’t comparing homosexuality to bestiality – he’s was taking the roof off of the logic used to argue for same-sex marriage. If you redefine the term ‘marriage’ once, who’s to say that it won’t be redefined again to be more ‘inclusive’ of other types of unions?

    Like

  7. Neil, et al:

    Good morning! Harry R. Jackson, Jr. at Townhall (link: http://townhall.com/columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2009/04/20/in_the_fray_the_battle_for_marriage?page=full&comments=true)
    has a piece today that is relevent to this thread. The take home message from my vantage point is:

    It is time for Christians around the nation to understand that behind the so-called gay rights movement is a desire to silence biblically faithful Christians.

    Secondly, I find it ironic that if one doesn’t advocate or embrace the notion of same sex marriage, the tolerent left is quick to label those opposed to their vision as hateful, religous, bigoted rubes.

    Resepectfully,
    Joseph

    Like

  8. Addendum:

    Just heard about the Miss USA flap from this past weekend where a contestant was asked if she agreed or disagreed about same sex marriage. by an openly gay man who was one of the judges. The contestant answered openly and honestly that marriage was defined as a union between a man and a woman, and that her belief was based upon the bible. Most of those that follow this event believed that she lost the contest due to her politically incorrect answer. Furthermore, the openly gay judge who is some Hollwood blogger has denounced this honest young lady as “a dumb b*tch”. What a remarkably accepting and tolerant response. Secondly, don’t ask a question, if you don’t want an honest answer.

    Respectfully,
    Joseph

    Like

  9. Hi Joseph,

    Yes, the world is upside down, just like Romans 1 describes it. Is the media taking taking the judge to task for his bigoted, sexist remarks? The question itself was part of a “gotcha” exercise to demonize anyone who dares criticize the homosexual agenda. Think about how many people it silences!

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s