Why do some Christians seem to think homosexual marriage is a danger to society?

"Seems to suggest" is not proof. It is not fact. Vaginas and penises and procreation are factual evidence that human sexuality is male female. Any other sex is a perversion.

 

Really? You're going to nitpick at my phrasing instead of actually arguing against me?

I avoid absolute statements most of the time unless I'm going for dramatic effect. It's just a reflexive mannerism of mine to phrase things ambiguously.

The fact is that I gave you the science that you asked for, and now you're the one trying to argue with nothing. How does it feel to be a hypocrite?

 

IMO, most Christians simply have a reverence for marriage. They feel that it's the backbone of a fruitful society. I think most don't look at the situation as "How will it affect me" but wonder if it's the best arrangement and condition for an overall civilization. Some people just don't wanna see the institutions of their parents go by the wayside, but also realize you can't stop the winds of change. (think that was a song). I think most Christians would challenge this in the courts, but are not virulent and will accept the condition if need be.

Perhaps this very good question could also be asked of our Muslim leaders. I suspect this ethnic and cultural entity might exhibit a greater degree of zeal and resistance to our topic than their monotheistic counterparts.

IMO, advocates of a gay-marriage society are similarly "imposing their beliefs" on those who favor a traditional marriage society.

Very thought provoking OP and much appreciated.

 

Quite honestly, I hold no delusion that legal recognition of my marriage to my same-sex partner would create societal acceptance of us as equals.

 

I've seen all I need to.

 

No, no, no, no, no.

We are not advocating a "gay marriage society". I don't want to get rid of people's traditions surrounding marriage. I don't want to get rid of opposite-sex marriage. I just want the equal right to marry my same-sex partner. That doesn't impose on anyone, unless they have some kind of twisted idea that anyone doing something they disagree with is an "imposition". I have no obligation to accommodate their desire to prevent me from marrying my partner just because they think it's icky or because they think their religion tells them so. They are the ones imposing on me, by restricting my liberty.

 

Marriage is primarily a civil and legal institution. Everyone is free, and will continue to be free to assign whatever religious meaning they wish, and have their religious ceremony, and yes, their reverence for marriage. It's not about Christians vs. gay marriage. Many gay people are Christians and many Christian and Christian churches welcome and support gays and gay marriage.

It is ridiculous to say that anyone is imposing their beliefs on anyone. How do you do that? Can I make you believe something that you don't want to believe? It would take someone with a very weak mind to allow someone else to manipulate their beliefs. No ody cares what you believe. We only care about how you behave towards and treat others.

 

I am solidly in favor of gay marriage at this point, but I did spend most of my life on the fence. The argument that kept me there was the "traditional concept of marriage" concern (slippery slope and all that nonsense). At this point I think that as long as marriage is still a two sound minded adults partnership those concerns are moot.

Good luck with everyone else though....

 

No, I didnt move anything. I just dont believe joseph gobbels is a legitimate source of information.

You could make the same claim that bestiality is natural and has been occuring for thousands of years, and probably millions on top of that.

 

I've read the science. It is in no way conclusive or fact. As with evolution, those who support homosexuality as normal are claiming a missing link.

 

No you haven't....

 

The push for gay marriage has nothing to do with equal rights and has everything to do with attempting to equalize a perverse lifestyle with our natural biological state. This is not a religious condemnation, it is just an honest view of reality.

If gays were being honest, they would recognize their choice for what it is as an unequal(sexually) lifestyle choice. It is proven to be unhealthy(physically)and non reproductive of humanity. The fact that human sexuality is not exclusively reproductive does not change any biological facts.

I would have far more respect for homosexuals if they admitted reality and just lived their deviant lifestyle choice quietly showing respect for our species natural state.

 

The fact of something occurring in nature being natural a difficult concept?

 

Luckily they don't need your respect and SSM will be legal despite your BS rants. I'm glad the majority in this country aren't ignorant (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*) homophobic idiots and actually accept and treat gay people equally.

 

lol

Our species natural state does contain aspects of homosexuality. Homosexuality occurs in nature is therefore natural. So homosexuals are acting out on their natural urges to have sex with a partner of the same sex. As for it being non-reproductive, who cares? There are too many people living on this planet, we need fewer couples having children, not more.

 

I'm only finding 2 cases, out of the 36 states that have same sex recognition, where the people voted or approved legislation.

Most cases are federal court cases. As with Oklahoma, I'm sure the majority were against a vote of the people.

You can scroll down to the United States section. It will show the states and the legal means at which SS was implemented.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_marriage_in_Maryland

 

Rights aren't subject to popular vote.

 

So, you are saying that pedophilia, incest and beastiality are natural. Your assertion is hogwash. People acting on perversions does not constitute natural human sexual behavior.

 

So, you are fine with brothers marrying sisters, fathers and daughters and mothers and sons having the right to marry? You believe society has no say in recognizing these perversions?

 

It is natural, however, we have made laws against acting on pedophilia, incest and bestiality. Your whole comments are based on "natural is good" which has been shown to be BS. Sometimes natural things aren't good and sometimes natural things aren't good or bad necessarily.

This is why your side has lost the SSM battle. You try to BS your way out of it and you simply can't.

- - - Updated - - -

Currently there are arguments and studies that have shown father/daughter, mother/son relationships to be negative psychologically for the son or daughter. However, if you want to fight for the rights so a brother can marry a brother, you go right on ahead.

 

No relevance to same sex marriage.

Society has no business telling consenting adults what they can or can't do.

 

I would argue that perversions have no business defining humanity. The only fair solution is eliminating official recognition of marriages.

 

And I'll point out perversion is subjective.

Which isn't going to happen. And it's hilarious that "solution" only came about because you don't want fellow citizens getting equal rights.

 

Perversions of our natural state are not equal to it. All citizens have an equal right to our natural state. Your promoting an additional right to a perversion , which is a degradation of humanity.

 

Perversion is subjective. Same sex couples are identically married as opposite sex couples.

There isn't an additional right. And perversion is subjective.