TV's Frink said:
I'm gonna go Warb for this one...
ferris209 said:
Additionally, I certainly do think there is a slippery slope. This idea is mocked and downplayed, but it is reality. If "gay marriage" is permitted, why restrict polygamy, why restrict marriage between a man and animal, why restrict marriage between the living and the dead, why restrict marrying an inanimate object, so on and so forth. These are debates that are currentlyhappening, and will continue should there be no single simple definition that is understood and agreed upon. Such as marriage is a legal, lawful, and spiritual union of one man and one woman.
Because two like-minded people marrying is the same thing as a person marrying a building or a pillow.
The problem, though, is that the definition of marriage has been changed from "a permanent union of a man and a woman" to "a bond [notice the absence of "permanent"] between two people". So what's to prevent that to being changed to "a bond between two animate objects" or something similar? It may sound absurd, but look at how different the first two definitions of marriage are.
Too many believe that disagreeing with homosexuality is hateful in and of itself, this is completely and utterly wrong. It is possible, and common I believe, to be tolerant, yet disagreeable. I love all of my gay brothers and sisters, I pray they can find salvation, but I feel they regularly perform sinful acts. I feel as equally about them as I do my brother and sisters who drink to excess, commit adultery, have lust in their hearts, or have sex prior to marriage. I myself am a sinner on the level of homosexuals as I did have sex prior to marriage, I regularly drink to excess, and I have a strong lust in my heart for other women. So why would I hate someone who, I believe, sins as much as I?
Drinking to excess can harm others. Adultery definitely hurts others. Lust in your heart is a bit different if you don't act, so I'll set that one aside.
What harm does sex prior to marriage or gay marriage do to others?
Premarital sex does a lot of harm to the people involved. They are far more likely to divorce, plus there is a much greater chance of contracting STDs with multiple sex partners. If you make the claim that suppressing premarital sex results in more premarital sex and therefore more babies being born out of wedlock, take a look at the hundreds of years during which this kind of thing was heavily discouraged and compare out-of-wedlock pregnancies then with those now. Also, those who have sex before marriage are more likely to cheat, and less likely to enjoy sex as much once they are married than those who remain virgin until marriage. Additionally, people who have sex before marriage are more likely to link a good relationship with sex (even if just psychologically) which can lead to them viewing their partner in a completely different light than if they remained chaste until marriage and married the person for who they are. Not everyone is like that, I know, but the increase of infidelity among those who have more sexual partners and have sex before marriage is an indicator of that attitude. Also, a guy can far more easily dump a pregnant girlfriend than a pregnant wife, so in the former case the girl is more likely to be left in a far worse position than she would if she (a) had the baby within marriage or (b) hadn't had sex at all.
I would hunt down my sources, but I don't have the time right now and I have heard these things over and over again from various places, so I trust that information and my common sense enough to believe it.
Gay marriage is less harmful if no child is adopted (children adopted by homosexual parents tend to have a rough life, and I'm sure you're smart enough that you can think of reasons why, other than being bullied by people for it). Homosexual couples tend to also be less happy than heterosexual couples.
Read this article to get a more detailed answer to the gay marriage problem, though you may want to read only what interests you and skip the sections that you don't want the answers for, as it is a rather long article. Section IV is probably the most interesting, and the one most relevant to your question.
I have gay relatives, gay co-workers, and gay friends; all of whom I love. However, I simply do not condone their bedroom decisions anymore than I condone the bedroom decisions of the adulterer relatives, co-workers, and friends I have. Furthermore, as much I may love these folks, I just don't want their adulterer lifestyles flaunted and forced upon me and my family. I also know several relatives, co-workers, and friends who regularly lust after women who are not their wives or spouses. I do not want them flaunting, displaying, or having laws put in place to enforce or justify their sin of lust of which I'd have to explain to my 5 year old daughter sooner than I'd certainly intended.
I wouldn't ask you to condone homosexual activity, you are welcome to your opinion. But it is wrong to deny equality to others just because it makes you uncomfortable and you don't want to have to explain it to your daughter.
Don't you think it would be confusing to a child who sees that his/her friends all have a mom and dad but has two dads or two moms of her own?
How does one flaunt an adulterer lifestyle, anyway?
Not sure...
But somehow, certain parts of society feel that I am wrong and that my 5 year old should be fully exposed to sexuality, homosexuality, adultery, and lust right now; not at my own or her own timeline. Some feel that if I should explain to her my belief these are sins, then I am a bigot. Some force upon us that if I do not capitulate, then I am an active bigot.
Certain parts of society want you to expose her to adultery and lust right now? Explain how.
At school, it is generally acceptable for kids to talk about sex in all kinds of detail, so it is pretty darn hard to keep a child away from that. As a teenager, she will likely be pressured to have sex, or at least view pornography. In our society you aren't "cool" if you don't have sex, so don't claim that she can escape it. Perhaps society as a whole doesn't have a desire to expose her to it, but her peers sure will. And don't deny that either. Being a teenager myself, I know what teenagers are like in our society and most of them seem to want to flaunt their knowledge and experience of sex to all their peers.
Homosexuality is part of sexuality, like it or not. I fail to see how seeing two men or women getting married would scar her for life. We're not asking you to show her gay porn.
For a young child, it is confusing to see two people of the same gender marry when most married couples you know of are heterosexual. It is also highly debatable whether or not homosexuality is actually part of sexuality.
To these, I say damned you. Every person should keep their sexual desires and sins private and should allow me the right to teach my children how I please and when I please about those who have different beliefs than us, rather than some judge or five justices forcing me by fiat to have to explain these things sooner than I intended.
I can't wrap my head around this. You should be advocating for no marriage at all based on this. Oh, and you believe apples have no special powers, right? I believe if I put an apple on my head it brings me good luck. But in your world, I can't put an apple on my head in public because it would be pushing my beliefs on you and your daughter rather than letting you choose when to teach her apples aren't like that.
I don't think the government should "marry" people at all. In my view, yes, I think there shouldn't be any civil unions. I think marriage should not be meddled with and defined by the government.
