Those opposed to "gay marriage" will you explain your position to me?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Full disclosure: I am a gay marriage supporter, and voted for it in Maryland. So I am not exactly the person you are talking to. Further, I suspect that many of the supposed opponents of gay marriage on this thread are actually supporters trying to make opponents look terrible. But that's just a guess. On the internet no one knows you are a dog.

OP here, thank you for your post, it was about the only one that looked at the issue without religion, and that was what I asked for. I appreciate it.

The rest of the reasons seem to be from people who pick and choose what they want to call sin and ignore everything else about the bible. Even though they feel the bible is the literal word of God and a manual to live by. They also seem to be obsessed with PDA and sex by homosexual couples. Which I find so odd.

In fact when I laid out exactly what biblical sex was I was told I was doing it wrong.

When I talked about mixing wool with another fabric was a nono I was told everyone did it, including me.

However homosexuality, that seems to be the most important part of the bible to the opponents.

Since it seems you can only argue in biblical terms...
The most important part to me, a devout catholic?

John 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life."

and

Starting with Mark 12:28
One of the teachers of the law came and heard them debating. Noticing that Jesus had given them a good answer, he asked him, "Of all the commandments, which is the most important?"
"The most important one," answered Jesus, "is this: 'Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one.
Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind and with all your strength.'
The second is this: 'Love your neighbor as yourself.' There is no commandment greater than these."
Well said, teacher," the man replied. "You are right in saying that God is one and there is no other but him.
To love him with all your heart, with all your understanding and with all your strength, and to love your neighbor as yourself is more important than all burnt offerings and sacrifices."

His words. Not one mention of sodomy. Not one mention of "Adam and Steve" not one mention of denying those you find distasteful.
Just love your neighbor, treat your neighbor as you would be treated. There is no greater commandment.

Have you forgotten this quote? “I asked Jesus, ‘How much do you love me?’ And Jesus said, ‘This much.’ Then He stretched out His arms and died.”

No mention of dying for heterosexuals, no mention of marriage being between a man and a woman. Just that he so loved the world he died for our sins. All of us sinners. Read the ten commandments, those of you who oppose gay marriage. Are you flawless? I think not, none of us are. Are you saying homosexuality is a greater sin than the ten commandments? Are you somehow exempt from Jesus' greatest commandment?

You should be ashamed.

You're a devout liar, but a Catholic- No! Just because you go through the rigamarole to maintain the title of Catholic doesn't make you one- especially not traipsing on an anonymous board to find validation for your very un-Christian beliefs. Take this nonsense to your pastor and let us all know what he says. Waiting to hear back, but not holding my breathe... BTW the devil comes in many forms including imposters pretending to be Catholic.

Just curious, what does your pastor say about mixing fabrics?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don't think the word marriage means a gay marriage.

I deeply resent this re-tooling of the English language to further your agenda.

I don't think Gays should be able to adopt on the same basis as heterosexual couples. I am not blanket opposed but I feel preference should be given to straights as this is more what nature intended for kids.

Those are my objections. I don't really voice them any more simply because I got tired of being called a bigot.

Now that this debate is resolved (in favor of gay marriage), I don't care too much anymore about it.

The "agenda" is less "a retooling of the English language" than it is "making sure gay families are legally protected". Given a choice between linguistic purity and the protection of actual human beings and their families, I know which one I find more compelling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

Incest can certainly be between consenting adults. The same with polygamy. Let's see how the campaign and flag-waving for those are received.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Gay marriage is not about Christians. Do you think everything is always all about you?

If every Christian disappeared tomorrow, I would still want the legal protections of marriage for my family.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Willful ignorance is the only explanation I can think of.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Gay marriage is not about Christians. Do you think everything is always all about you?

If every Christian disappeared tomorrow, I would still want the legal protections of marriage for my family.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Willful ignorance is the only explanation I can think of.

You have willful ignorance. A marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Period. What are you not understanding?if this is about protection for your "family" than a civil union with the same rights as a marriage is what will solve all of this craziness. Secondly, children with gay parents have psychological problems stemming from the isolation from the biological missing parent. How you can ignore this and exploit children for your own selfish desire is unconscionable. I am vehemently opposed to the laws allowing abuse of children- ie gays procuring kids. In the case of adoption, I'd accept that as a last resort. In that case a gay home is better than a life in the streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Gay marriage is not about Christians. Do you think everything is always all about you?

If every Christian disappeared tomorrow, I would still want the legal protections of marriage for my family.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Willful ignorance is the only explanation I can think of.

You have willful ignorance. A marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Period. What are you not understanding?if this is about protection for your "family" than a civil union with the same rights as a marriage is what will solve all of this craziness. Secondly, children with gay parents have psychological problems stemming from the isolation from the biological missing parent. How you can ignore this and exploit children for your own selfish desire is unconscionable. I am vehemently opposed to the laws allowing abuse of children- ie gays procuring kids. In the case of adoption, I'd accept that as a last resort. In that case a gay home is better than a life in the streets.

1) Civil unions do not offer the same legal protection as marriage. You are factually wrong.
2) Children with gay parents do not have psychological problems at a rate higher than those with heterosexual parents. You are factually wrong.

Since you're unwilling to engage with what the rest of the world calls "facts", it gives me a pretty clear idea what your actual motivations are.

You are vile. Thank god it's no longer socially acceptable for people like you to spew their ignorant malice in public. Enjoy your anonymous message boards and mourn the days when people like you were the norm. They're not coming back.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Gay marriage is not about Christians. Do you think everything is always all about you?

If every Christian disappeared tomorrow, I would still want the legal protections of marriage for my family.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Willful ignorance is the only explanation I can think of.

You have willful ignorance. A marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Period. What are you not understanding?if this is about protection for your "family" than a civil union with the same rights as a marriage is what will solve all of this craziness. Secondly, children with gay parents have psychological problems stemming from the isolation from the biological missing parent. How you can ignore this and exploit children for your own selfish desire is unconscionable. I am vehemently opposed to the laws allowing abuse of children- ie gays procuring kids. In the case of adoption, I'd accept that as a last resort. In that case a gay home is better than a life in the streets.

Saying this over and over again does not make it any more true. There is nothing in the law or our constitution that prevents marriage from changing. If you want government out of marriage, get rid of legal marriage entirely. Leave that to the churches and revert everyone to civil commitment.

But you won't do that because you want it both ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems to me that a lot of the opposition to gay marriage is over the word marriage. Gay marriage by any other name would receive a lot less resistance.

That's right. Marriage has religious connotations . Gays are more interested in changing the bible and convincing the majority that sodomy is not a sin than in getting married. Everybody knows why AIDS and STDs flourish in the gay community. Sometimes sin is actually dangerous and unhealthy.

Gay marriage is not about Christians. Do you think everything is always all about you?

If every Christian disappeared tomorrow, I would still want the legal protections of marriage for my family.

Why is that so difficult for you to understand? Willful ignorance is the only explanation I can think of.

You have willful ignorance. A marriage can only be between a man and a woman. Period. What are you not understanding?if this is about protection for your "family" than a civil union with the same rights as a marriage is what will solve all of this craziness. Secondly, children with gay parents have psychological problems stemming from the isolation from the biological missing parent. How you can ignore this and exploit children for your own selfish desire is unconscionable. I am vehemently opposed to the laws allowing abuse of children- ie gays procuring kids. In the case of adoption, I'd accept that as a last resort. In that case a gay home is better than a life in the streets.

1) Civil unions do not offer the same legal protection as marriage. You are factually wrong.
2) Children with gay parents do not have psychological problems at a rate higher than those with heterosexual parents. You are factually wrong.

Since you're unwilling to engage with what the rest of the world calls "facts", it gives me a pretty clear idea what your actual motivations are.

You are vile. Thank god it's no longer socially acceptable for people like you to spew their ignorant malice in public. Enjoy your anonymous message boards and mourn the days when people like you were the norm. They're not coming back.

+1
I was about to say something a lot nastier but what's the point. The ignorant bigot does not matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So to sum up, the totality of the arguments against are:

- the bible says marriage is between a man and a woman (no comment on the fact it also says you can't mix fabrics);

- the bits don't match up; and

- it's a slippery slope to (insert random thing).

Did I miss anything?

Also, "I don't want to have to explain analingus to my child."

[Anonymous]

I consider homosexuality somewhere in between mental illness and deviant, and don't want to legitimate it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So to sum up, the totality of the arguments against are:

- the bible says marriage is between a man and a woman (no comment on the fact it also says you can't mix fabrics);

- the bits don't match up; and

- it's a slippery slope to (insert random thing).

Did I miss anything?

Also, "I don't want to have to explain analingus to my child."

Yep. It's pretty much:

Because BIBLE.
Because ICKY.
Because NATURE.
Because (one version of) HISTORY.
Because INCEST/BESTIALITY!!

That's really all they've got. No wonder that courts have not found these arguments too compelling.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I consider homosexuality somewhere in between mental illness and deviant, and don't want to legitimate it.

You have a right to feel that way. And you're not alone.

But, so what? You're hateful and ignorant and those who respect human rights and the law don't care about your 'wants'.

[Anonymous]

We let deviants and mentally ill straight people marry all the time. So?

[Anonymous]

I think being gay is a choice for most, as I think the straight to gay line is just a continuum based on societal, culrural and genetic factors. To argue otherwise is an insult to gay people. In other cultures, with less of a religious objection to gayness, the percentage is much higher. So, in other words, a small number are 100% gay, but most are somewhere on the scale.

All that said, I think having less gays is better for the society (but not zero), stop I don't want more people making the choice. I'd like to keep it around 2-3%.