Seriously, is there any logical argument against gay marriage?

reply to post by kevinunknown


No, the intent isn't to make religious people who are against homosexual marriage appear homophobic, the intent of this thread is to prove that there really isn't a logical argument against homosexual marriage.

There isn't a logical argument that can be made against homosexual marriage. Conversely, every argument that is made against homosexual marriage can be countered logically, which as been demonstrated many times throughout the course of this thread.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Something very interesting has struck me reading through this thread, I have not read all of it but its already clear what is happening.

People propose a logical and sensible argument against homosexual marriage in the whole, from what I have read, these arguments are not homophobic however there are a few exceptions. Then those who support secularisation come crawling out of the wood work and flame them for it. This thread is seems has became a Mecca for those who just want to make out all religious people are homophobes. Why is that we are being persecuted for our beliefs?

There does not seem to be any logical argument for forcing the religious orders who view homosexuality as a sin to change. This is one of the biggest problems with these stupid liberal notions of “freedom” you can’t have freedom of sexuality and freedom of religion if your going to force a suppression the rights of the religious folks to appease the rights of the homosexuals. This also shows up how stupid freedom of speech is, I can’t say that I am against homosexual marriage without being made out to be some kind of monster because I do not hold the same stupid liberal views as you. Quite strange because when you really start to look at this argument “Is homosexual marriage acceptable” it shows just how stupid the ideals of liberalism are because it just doesn’t work. I don’t think any of you liberals can have a view on this because either way you go your contradicting yourself and your ideology.

Liberalism (Classical) is what is destroying our society.

A bit rich really.
...i mean its not like religious establishments down through the ages EVER tried to force dogma on anyone...did they?
Misguided dogma is destroying our society...people who cannot think for themselves, read Who weekly and beleive what they read in the local rag.
Sad really
Akushla

Can we just make it clear that marriage is when you are joined in holy matrimony and when you are “married” in a court, you are entering a civil partnership, union or whatever your state wants to call it.

If this thread is about homosexuals being married in to holy matrimony I cannot agree as my Church dictates that homosexuality is not compatible with this religious sacrament of marriage. If however this thread is about homosexuals entering civil partnership/union then I have no objection as this is not infringing on my religious beliefs or dogma.

Originally posted by arbitrarygeneraiist
reply to post by kevinunknown

 

No, the intent isn't to make religious people who are against homosexual marriage appear homophobic, the intent of this thread is to prove that there really isn't a logical argument against homosexual marriage.

There isn't a logical argument that can be made against homosexual marriage. Conversely, every argument against homosexual marriage can be countered logically.

edit on 22-5-2011 by arbitrarygeneraiist because: (no reason given)

saying " every argument against homosexual marriage can be countered logically" is very arrogant of yourself
a person with a predetermined opinion running into a logical argument would say that

This isn't about two people of the same sex getting married really it's about a shifting culture. Collectively, we think about marriage differently, on a spectrum, because our cultural definition of it is changing. There are those of us who believe in in religiously and will say "well, in the year 1200 it was done like this! it's purpose was this! look at it in this book i read!" It is not the year 1200 and everything changes.

For lots of us religion never enters our imaginations, because we live in the world rather than sheltering ourselves from the world with some imaginary thing. A set of ideals handed down to you by an authoritarian god, to be followed just for the sake of following them because everyone around you claims to follow them too. And not even the good rules, like "love thy neighbor" which, according to you, god himself said, but obscure rules written by man like "two dudes having sex and living together is gross to me personally, some guy (not god)"

Originally posted by smitts_lgp
I believe it's wrong. Now don't crucify me for this, but I believe one of, if not the only purpose to life in general, is to reproduce.The continuity of species. In this conclusion, I feel it's simply selfish.

Wow, ok. So if I choose not to have kids I'm selfish am I? The human population is getting larger every day, and I highly doubt letting gay people get married is going to significantly effect the population numbers, let alone reverse it. In all actuality, you should be worried about the millions of hectares of forest that get destroyed each year with our need to fuel the rapidly growing population. That is seriously 999999 trillion times more likely to doom us all than the human population being at some sort of risk due to gay people. End rant.

To the OP...
Here is one:

Homosexual relationships do nothing to serve the state interest of propagating society, so there is no reason to grant them the costly benefits of marriage.

www.freerepublic.com...

The entire premise can be dismissed out of hand. It doesn't matter how you "feel".

reply to post by akushla99


I am not arguing for a move towards the establishment of theocratic states were the Church rules with a iron fist, history as you have pointed out teaches us this does not work. I would much rather see a Socialist Utopia

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Can we just make it clear that marriage is when you are joined in holy matrimony and when you are “married” in a court, you are entering a civil partnership, union or whatever your state wants to call it.

If this thread is about homosexuals being married in to holy matrimony I cannot agree as my Church dictates that homosexuality is not compatible with this religious sacrament of marriage. If however this thread is about homosexuals entering civil partnership/union then I have no objection as this is not infringing on my religious beliefs or dogma.

What does your Church say about...Thou shalt no kill? Are you a vegetarian?
Let he who has not 'sinned' (including the pastors/priests who you would slavishly follow without question) cast the first stone.
Christ includes...the devil divides!
Akushla

I'm not sure of what specifically we are discussing anymore
here is what I can understand from the other posts:

gay unions should have all the rights of a traditional marriage - agreed
gay unions should not considered traditional marriages, but civil unions - agreed on that too

is this the consensus here?

reply to post by quietlearner


It may have been poorly phrased, but it isn't any less arrogant (and actually is even more arrogant) to say that homosexuality is a sin and homosexuals do not deserve to be married with the blessing of God.

That kind of mindset is directly taking the supernatural position of God that no human who practices an Abrahamic religion has the right to take.

My philosophy is that everything can be countered.

Originally posted by kevinunknown
reply to post by akushla99

 

I am not arguing for a move towards the establishment of theocratic states were the Church rules with a iron fist, history as you have pointed out teaches us this does not work. I would much rather see a Socialist Utopia

Fair enough.
Akushla

Originally posted by kevinunknown
Can we just make it clear that marriage is when you are joined in holy matrimony and when you are “married” in a court, you are entering a civil partnership, union or whatever your state wants to call it.

If this thread is about homosexuals being married in to holy matrimony I cannot agree as my Church dictates that homosexuality is not compatible with this religious sacrament of marriage. If however this thread is about homosexuals entering civil partnership/union then I have no objection as this is not infringing on my religious beliefs or dogma.

Well... Considering that I got a MARRIAGE certificate from the court, having had a MARRIAGE ceremony presided by the judge... I don't think that We can define marriage as only "holy matrimony." That would be a religious group's definition of marriage...but not Our legal system's.

So I think it's fair to say that marriage, as a legal definition, covers more bases than a religious one.

Something tells me all the bible unnatural act thumpers probably all get more than their fair share of bacon. That's outlawed in the bible too. So is braiding your hair, or wearing gold. Both fully unnatural, braided hair appears nowhere in nature, homosexuality does though.

1 Timothy 2:9

I also want women to dress modestly, with decency and propriety, not with braided hair or gold or pearls or expensive clothes,

If homosexuals are an abomination then so is everyone who braids their hair if we believe in every rule of the bible.

Originally posted by Caji316
One reason....well, man and man cannot produce a man....Is that reason enough? I believe the future generations think so....

Do you know how stupid you sound?
You cant have all 7 billion people in this world reproducing all you people need to realize that gay people are needed for a stable society...Population control..i know some are having thier own babies but most are not and a lot adopt that also is amazing for our society as well..why bring another kid into the horrible world we got when you can love one thats already here...how can you agrue with the logic in that?

Originally posted by ChaoticOrder

Originally posted by smitts_lgp
I believe it's wrong. Now don't crucify me for this, but I believe one of, if not the only purpose to life in general, is to reproduce.The continuity of species. In this conclusion, I feel it's simply selfish.

Wow, ok. So if I choose not to have kids I'm selfish am I? The human population is getting larger every day, and I highly doubt letting gay people get married is going to significantly effect the population numbers, let alone reverse it. In all actuality, you should be worried about the millions of hectares of forest that get destroyed each year with our need to fuel the rapidly growing population. That is seriously 999999 trillion times more likely to doom us all than the human population being at some sort of risk due to gay people. End rant.

edit on 22-5-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)

I think it can be called selfish to a degree because you want all the benefits of marriages with kids yet you won't/can't have kids

reply to post by kevinunknown


"Why is that we are being persecuted for our beliefs? "

Your beliefs is what keeps you in a state of non-acceptance of your fellow human who just wants to live their life on the same legal/spiritually recognised terms, without discrimination, as other members of society do. Keep your judgements for the criminals and not for people who chose an alternative lifestyle to yours.
Gay people are no threat to you unless you create a perceived threat within your mind... then you cross your god's command of 'Do not judge'

Take your pick of which version you follow.

bible.cc...

bible.cc...

reply to post by Amaterasu


If you’re going to call it “marriage” then fair enough, if it does not have a religious component in my mind it is not a true marriage however it is social recognised by it is not recognised in the eyes of the Church.

If this thread is about homosexuals entering into a civil partnership/ union or some other social and legal recognition of their partnership I have no objection.

If this thread is about homosexuals entering into holy matrimony then I have a very big objection.

reply to post by LexiconV


I have no problem with homosexuals entering into a formal partnership that is socially and legally recognised.

I do however have a very big objection with homosexuals entering into holy matrimony as this is a religious sacrament that is not compatible with homosexuality.

reply to post by kevinunknown


There are religions that accept homosexual marriage and would officiate a homosexual marriage. Under these conditions would you view that homosexual marriage as a real marriage? Or do you view marriages that take place outside of Christianity as something different than marriage?

For example, do you believe that a Hindu marriage is a fake marriage?