Why does it have to be gay "marriage?"

by spiritwalker 74 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  spiritwalker

  I know this a hot topic, but I had some thinking on it I wanted to discuss. To begin, I have nothing against a gay man or lesbian woman and consider many to be friends. I would also like to express from the beginning in plain thought, "I think gay unions should be legal and do not see why it matters."

  What is the single biggest threat to marriage and the family arrangement.

  As I grew up, I knew so many young people who were in stable families, of love and kindness and with parents who did their best to make life what they wanted it to be for their children. In doing, it can not be ignored that one in two marriages fails and most children are being raised in a single parent environment. With this being the case, and even as an adult today. I have often seen more problems, anger and frustration from a marriage that is breaking-up. Then I have ever seen from a marriage that is coming together. So the biggest threat to marriage and the family arrangement, is not gays getting married, but rather straight people getting divorced and breaking the vow they showed meant nothing.

  Why does it have to be called marriage?

  The dictionary defines marriage as, "The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife." Which is honestly what I see as the word meaning. I am a straight person, and consider the title of straight to be very fitting. Tomorrow, although I do not find myself to be attracted to the same sex, I am going to start calling myself a gay or lesbian. As definitions do not seem to matter in this world anymore. The sky is now green and the grass is now red. What is my point? It is this, why does the term marriage have to be used when a gay couple get legally bound? Why not a "loving-union" or a "connection of hearts" or any other term, other then the one we know in the dictionary as, "The legal union of a man and woman as husband and wife." Basically, I am not gay or a lesbian, as I do not fit the definition and I think the gay/lesbian community would find me saying I was, when I wasn't ... wrong. So I stick with my title the this world give me, straight.

  So basically, I see it this way. Allow gay couples to make their union legal in all states, perform ceremonies and make it have all the bells and bows you want. Just do not do two things, do not say gays doing this is a threat to the family arrangement and do not try to pull the wool over my eyes into knowing what the word marriage has meant for 1000's of years. Just find a new word, let the ceremonies begin and lets all get on to something that really matters. Like, who is going to win survivor or something.
• 

  MorpheuzX

  It often amuses me that the same people who watch and are entertained by shows like Joe Millionaire, the Bachelor and the Bachelorette -- all of which completely debase and undermine marriage -- are often vehemently opposed to gay marriage. (Apparently it's okay to make a mockery of marriage on national television for the amusement of millions of viewers, but only if straight people are doing it.)
  

  Spiritwalker, I agree with part of your statement, in specific on the semantics or wording of the acknowledgment of the gay/lesbian unions. Perhaps civil-unions are the best real-world solution to this dispute. I'm certainly not a constitutional scholar, but separate is not equal (May 17th, 1954 Supreme Court ruling in the case Brown vs. Board of Education.) Calling one relationship a gay union and another a marriage carries with it both a denotative and connotative disparity in meaning.

  As for changing the biblical and historical definition of marriage, I don't think the fundamentalist have a leg to stand on in that regard. Let's not forget the that most of the first biblical marriages were polygamous -- and approved of by god, i.e., Abraham, Solomon, David all had multiple wives.

  For the benefit of all you bible-thumpers out there that think I'm making that up, I suggest you read the following verses:

  Exodus 21:10

  If he marries another woman, he must not deprive the first one of her food, clothing and marital rights.

  2 Samuel 5:13

  After he left Hebron, David took more concubines and wives in Jerusalem, and more sons and daughters were born to him.

  1 Kings 11:3

  He (Solomon) had seven hundred wives of royal birth and three hundred concubines, and his wives led him astray.

  2 Chronicles 11:21

  Rehoboam loved Maacah daughter of Absalom more than any of his other wives and concubines. In all, he had eighteen wives and sixty concubines, twenty-eight sons and sixty daughters.

  Deuteronomy 21:15

  If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love,

  In fact the only place in the new testament that limits the amount of wives a man can have is in 1 Timothy 3:2 & 3:12, and Paul applies those limitation only to deacons and overseers.

  Just one more bible quote before I put my bible away, Malachi 3:6 For I am the LORD, I change not;

  Does that mean god is still okay with polygamy?

  So biblically, is marriage between one man and one woman or one man and many woman? I think the evidence above is pretty clear. As a culture we've rejected the bible's polygamous definition of marriage. So, why are we so timid to allow gays and lesbians to be married?

  I think we should endeavor to show tolerance and mercy to these persons. I can't help thinking about what this rather smart guy once said about how to deal with other people: "Blessed are those who mourn, For they shall be comforted. Blessed are the merciful, For they shall obtain mercy. Blessed are the pure in heart, For they shall see God. Blessed are the peacemakers, For they shall be called sons of God."

  Sorry if I sermonized, I just think Jesus was a lot more compassionate and understanding than most people give him credit for and that all humans should have equal rights, including the right to marry whomever they love.
• 

  Satans little helper

  the dictionary definition of marraige is irrelevant, this is a matter of principle. Do you believe in equal rights for all or are you a small minded right wing bigot?

  I couldn't care less who you sleep with or who you choose to commit the rest of your life to, we allow illiterate teenagers to marry each other and have the dignity of the legal framework that gives so why shouldn't gay people be given the same respect?

  It REALLY pisses me off that so many so called Christians are so bloody minded and judgemental when Jesus was anything but. Know this, if god does exist he hates you for being so unchristian
• 

  Golf

  MX, since your quoting from the Bible, lets continue. After being questioned by the Pharisees about divorce Jesus said, "Did you not read that that he who created them from THE BEGINNING made them male and female...therefore what God has yoked together let no man put apart."

  Guest 77
• 

  Englishman

  When HL and I first met, we decided, after we got to know one another, to set up home together. So we lived together and totally outraged both sets of parents by so doing.

  After a while, as our affection for each other increased, we both had the desire to make some sort of public committment to each other. I can't explain it in totally logical terms, relationships aren't like that being based to a great extent on emotion. Anyway we got married and made the relationship a legally recognised one.

  So I can't see any reason why 2 people of the same sex can't do the same. If homosexuality is a natural thing to some people then why should they not enjoy the same emotional fulfillment as married hetero's do.

  Let'em marry!

  Englishman.
• 

  Sirona

  I think let them marry and don't call it something else. Why say all of this is "set in stone"? Example: If someone said that we should carry on not touching a menstruating woman for 7 days or whatever it was (Old Testament) we'd all laugh at them.

  Sirona
• 

  Satans little helper

  what's so funny about that? I send Clare to the gates of the city as soon as her 'unclean time' comes each month so I am not defiled.
• 

  Yerusalyim

  the dictionary definition of marraige is irrelevant, this is a matter of principle. Do you believe in equal rights for all or are you a small minded right wing bigot? Time and time again I've said this, gays have the same rights to marry as do straights...to marry an adult of the opposite gender. I take then, Satan's little helper, that you also approve of polygamy, and think the state should sanction this with marriage, or allowing a father/daughter (or son) or a brother/sister (or brother) state sanctioned marriage? Or are you a small minded left wing blow hard?

  I couldn't care less who you sleep with or who you choose to commit the rest of your life to, I also could care less...I DO care about what relationships the state sanctions.we allow illiterate teenagers to marry each other and have the dignity of the legal framework that gives so why shouldn't gay people be given the same respect? Because the definition of marriage in the United States has ALWAYS been a man and a woman. If we allow gay marriage, the marriages I've mentioned above are equally legitamate...and then marriage in and of itself becomes meaningless.

  It REALLY pisses me off that so many so called Christians are so bloody minded bloody minded? People are being killed in this debate?and judgemental when Jesus was anything butThis really isn't a religious argument, but since you bring Jesus into it, his charge to the woman taken in adultery was to SIN NO MORE. Know this, if god does exist he hates you for being so unchristianHow humorous, someone who doesn't know if God exists judging Christians...hmmm.
• 

  Sirona

  Time and time again I've said this, gays have the same rights to marry as do straights...to marry an adult of the opposite gender. I take then, Satan's little helper, that you also approve of polygamy, and think the state should sanction this with marriage, or allowing a father/daughter (or son) or a brother/sister (or brother) state sanctioned marriage? Or are you a small minded left wing blow hard?

  Yeru

  Tell me how gay marriage will definately lead to polygamy? How will it lead to relatives marrying? I don't see the connection at all. Marriage law could be Man / Woman, Woman / Woman, or Man / Man. All adults over a certain age and not related.

  Sirona
• 

  Satans little helper

  Time and time again I've said this, gays have the same rights to marry as do straights...to marry an adult of the opposite gender. I take then, Satan's little helper, that you also approve of polygamy, and think the state should sanction this with marriage, or allowing a father/daughter (or son) or a brother/sister (or brother) state sanctioned marriage? Or are you a small minded left wing blow hard?

  Polygamy used to be ok in bible times so why not now? If your arguement rests on the biblical definition of marraige then you cannot argue against underage marraige, polygamy, or incestuous marraiges as these all are chronicled in the OT.

  If your arguement rests on what has been the basis of law then look at Utah, or that divorce was illegal in Ireland til very recently oh, and drugs were totally legal til quite recently, shall we go back to that situation? It's a fatuous arguement and holds no water.

  The point of this debate is that the moral compass has moved and the vast majority of people are more open minded and treasure equal rights. I have the right to marry who I love so why shouldn't gay people? All you are doing is trying to impose your morals on the rest of population, if that is the case how hard will you be able to scream if the next president decides to curb rights you hold dear?

  Edited to add: What was the average age of frontier wives when the US opened up? I'll give you a clue, it was below the current age of consent.