Something for Christians to think about regarding gay marriage

@katran (585)
United States
May 17, 2009 5:04pm CST
I myself am a Christian, and yet I cannot understand why so many of my fellow Christians are in adamant desire of a marriage amendment. We could argue about whether or not it is moral, but that is not the reason why I don't understand it. The reason I don't understand it is that there are a lot of things that the Bible says is wrong that no person in their right mind would say we need to pass a law against. For example, no adultery is one of the ten commandments, but there is no law against adultery. Another one of the ten commandments is that no one shall worship any other god, but no one would ever claim that we should make a law that makes it mandatory that everyone should worship the Christian God. Now, you could argue that gay marriage is bad for society. But if you are a Christian, don't you also believe that adultery is bad for society? Might you also believe that it would be better for society if everyone worshiped the Judeo-Christian God? But, would you argue that there should be a law mandating these things? And even if there was a law, how many people do you think would actually follow it? Christians aren't allowed to use the law to enforce any of their other religious beliefs. Why should this be any different? Why does any Christian believe it is okay for us to legislate our own religious prejudice?
3 people like this
12 responses
@Beertjie (976)
• South Africa
18 May 09
I think too many Christians are staring themselves blind against laws, and forget the most important part of the Bible. The Bible is about God, and god is into relationships. God wants for us to have a relationship with Him, and through that relationship each shall know what God desires of them. The Bible was not written to give us laws, but rather teach us about God's love and relationship with people. Each will stand before God and give account for their doings, even Christians who use the Bible in a wrong way and who condemn others. Who am I to judge. let each person make it out with the Lord if he/she so desires. I believe God is interested in all people and wants to have a relationship with all people. If you have a relationship with someone, you know what that person expects from you, and because you love that person, you will respect their ways. Same with God, if I love Him, I will know what is right between Him and me. We do not need government laws to enforce our Christian values upon us, we need a relationship with God. So, you are right, we should not expect our views to be government laws. Blessings
1 person likes this
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
20 May 09
It's supposed to be government of the people, by the people, and for the people. Government is supposed to reflect our views, beliefs and values. When it doesn't reflect the views of the majority, it is changed by the vote of the people. We are supposed to have a voice. I am not ashamed to vote my conscience, on any issue.
• United States
17 May 09
I know exactly what you mean, I brought this up in my previous comment, but those people seem to forget that there is supposed to be "Separation of Church and State", that means that there is not supposed to be religion or religious views mixed in with government or laws. And you already pointed out lots of valid reasons for there always being that rule, because not everyone shares the same beliefs. The fact of the matter is there really is no non-religious reason why marriage can only be between a man and a woman. If christians or any other religion could legislate their religious practices then that is not very democratic because you are infringing and trying to change other religions(or athesists)rights or beliefs in a legal way through the government. The beauty of this country is that everyone can be different and thats acceptable, as long as they are safe and non violent about it, I don't think it could stay that way if a religion had influence over laws
• United States
18 May 09
Yeah but that whole "In God We Trust" thing has been hotly debated as well because that goes against that rule of it. Most people call it "seperation of church and state" because its a lot shorter than spilling out the thing, but the principle and meaning is exactly the same. Not everyone believes in "God", its not just athesits its other religions that have their own different views, which is why that saying being on the money is a contradiction to the rule
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 May 09
Th term "seperation of church and state" does not apear anywhere in the constitution. It was a line in a letter from Jefferson to a Bishop who was to speak at his inauguration. As far as "in god we trust" being on the money, I don't see it as a big deal really. God is used on it as a generic title, the english word for diety (though capitolized) rather than refering to a specific god.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
18 May 09
"but those people seem to forget that there is supposed to be "Separation of Church and State", that means that there is not supposed to be religion or religious views mixed in with government or laws." This is actually untrue. "In God We Trust" is on our money as one example. The Separation of Church and State really is a principle based on the First Amendment which says: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." In other words, it ensures that our religious beliefs are removed from attempted government control. The government cannot tell you or your church what to believe or to teach and the government does not get involved with enforcing, mandating, or promoting particular religious doctrines. This stems from the problems created in Europe when the government established a church and something our founding fathers wanted this country to be free from.
@suspenseful (40193)
• Canada
17 May 09
What should have been done was from the beginning the Constitution should have stated that marriage is to be between man and woman and that divorce can only be granted for adultery, and extreme violence against one's spouse. It was not until the homosexual (also known as sodomites), lesbian or same-gender crowd decided that they wanted the same rights and more privileges then the rest of society. There would have no need for an amendment if someone back then had not had the gift of foreknowledge to know that in the 21st century a minority group that committed a gross sin want their sin to be made no sin and us who believed in marriage being between man and wife to be considered doing the gross sin. As for God, HE is the only God, and if HE wants some to be kept in their present state, we cannot fault HIM. And if one is guilty of one sin, one is guilty of all. They all are intertwined. both homosexuality and adultery are bad for society. Also remember years ago adultery was considered very serious. It should have been kept that way.
@katran (585)
• United States
17 May 09
But, suspenseful, what makes you think that you have the right to say that it should be the LAW that marriage should only be between a man and a woman just because that is what you believe to be right? Jewish people believe that eating pork is morally wrong. How would you like it if they got a law passed that you could not eat pork? My point is, if you have a set of personal beliefs that tells you homosexuality is wrong, that is fine. You can believe that, preach that, and do whatever you want. But neither the US nor Canada is a theocracy - we are democracies. We are not ruled by religious principles, and we are supposed to accept and protect people of ALL religions and beliefs. I do not think there is any way you could justify bringing your beliefs about homosexuality into the realm of law or politics.
@cyntrow (8523)
• United States
18 May 09
The writers of the Constitution came from all walks of life, thank God. They each fought for their own group and they made compromises. None of them would have thought to write bigotry and idiocy into the Constitution. For the record, a Sodomite would have been a resident of the city of Sodom, not a gay person.
@Barbietre (1438)
• United States
18 May 09
You are absolutely right, we do not gave the right to enforce our beliefs on anyone!I for one do not think a gay person getting married makes me any less married to my husband.
@krissy32 (205)
• United States
21 May 09
So true but there are those people who say if you don't worship God in their way you will go to hell. Who says so? Every church denomination says this in one way or another. I am no longer a Christian because of some the most blatant "do as I say, not as I do type of people. Us human beings are all sinners and all fall short of the glory of God. God calls us to worship Him and not commit blasphemy against Him. Gays have just as many rights as any one else, what they do behind closed doors is no one's business but their own, it doesn't affect anyone else's life, does it? Of course it doesn't. Since marriage has been taken over by the government via the licensing process, it has strayed far away from its original intent. If the governments had stayed out of it and allowed justices of the peace and religious leaders to perform marriages and left it alone, then those who chose to perform marriages would be free to marry who they wished to marry based upon their own beliefs.
@ClassyCat (1214)
• United States
18 May 09
Katran - - but the athiests ARE working against exactly what you said that they weren't. About some of the other comments here: I don't see why people get all bent out of shape when a person shares a scripture from the Bible. That is "not" shoving anything down anyone's throat. It is simply sharing what the Bible says. Endtime prophecies state that as we move deeper and deeper into the end of the age, that MANY will turn away from the faith, accepting and embracing fables, and 'personal choice beliefs' that are contrary to the Bible, and that is their free choice. There are things yet to come, which will begin to awaken people to the fact that those words penned so many centuries ago, came through the Holy Spirit and NOT mere human beings. God still speaks - many are just refusing to listen. 'Nuff said
@PrarieStyle (2486)
• United States
18 May 09
Their already talking about wanting triad marriages now, where will it all end? I suppose after that we will have to make poligamy legal. 80% of the country is against gay marriage, even President Obama is against it. Doesn't that account for anything? Why can't they just be satisfied with civil services?
@katran (585)
• United States
18 May 09
Where did you get the statistic that 80% of the country is against gay marriage? I have never heard that before. Could you please cite your source? Also, I am not saying that everyone needs to go out and get a gay marriage. I am just saying that I don't think we have the right to legislate our religion. Put yourself in other people's shoes. How would you feel if the atheists all got together and made it illegal to pray? In this country, everyone should be able to practice their own religion (or lack thereof) as long as it does not cause harm to someone else. That is what makes this country great. If you are for religious oppression, there are plenty of other countries that you could choose from.
1 person likes this
@mrbluey (36)
• Singapore
4 Jun 09
I applaud you, katran - you have wonderfully expounded a very true point on this topic. Perhaps it would be best if I posted a recent argument I made on this topic. It's more to deal with the Bible; how it doesn't even truly and definitively forbid homosexuality, and not the practical sort we discuss these days, relevant to our time and culture. Here's the link: http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/2006888.aspx
@heathcliff (1415)
• United States
17 May 09
Nicely done. No doubt we'd have a VERY different Constitution if radical Christians had written it or were allowed to rewrite it. Christian love should have enough forgiveness and understanding to accept different lifestyles. At least work to better individual lives when they find fault, not legislate against freedoms.
@xfahctor (14118)
• Lancaster, New Hampshire
18 May 09
Marriage itself isn't even mentioned in our constitution. It olny became a legal matter at the state level...until taxes became involved in it....go figure, then it became a federal issue. I think the government should get out of the marriage issue altogether. Divorces can be viewd as any other civil copntractual matter for purposes of property devision etc, and the custody issues can be settled as well in civil courts, but the insituttion of marriage itself should never have become a government matter. I am not a christian, I'm actualy Pagan, (this suprises people), but I do have a traditional view of marriage. I am a conservative person as well as a libertarian yes, notice I make a distinction there.
@Rollo1 (16679)
• Boston, Massachusetts
20 May 09
You ask" Why does any Christian believe it is okay for us to legislate our own religious prejudice?" I suppose I believe we have the right to make a law that reflects our beliefs is that this is the way the Constitution of the United States has the making of law set up. First, we vote for Senators and Representatives in Congress who best represent our viewpoints. We do this on a state level as well. Members of Congress may draft and put forth bills, which are then voted upon by the House and Senate members and if passed, submitted to the President for his signature or veto. The goal of course, is for the members of Congress to adequately represent the views of their constituencies. Our views and beliefs might be considered our prejudices. At this time, there is no majority of US voters who favor legalizing gay marriage as a federal law. Some states have some forms of civil unions or marriages, voted upon by the citizens of those states. Other states have citizens who have voted to ban gay marriage in their particular states, such as California. We do have the right to support the making of laws that reflect our beliefs, no matter what religion we are or whether we have no religious affiliation. As citizens of the United States, we have every right to support legislating our views into law. They only become law if a majority agree with us. At the present time, a majority of people are not in favor of gay marriage. I don't believe that a majority of people want to turn the bible into law, so there must be some people who aren't Christians, or who don't consider it strictly a religious belief, who do not support gay marriage rights. You should really go find them and try to convince them.
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
18 May 09
I don't believe that religious beliefs should be mixed with legislation but this is a hot button issue. Either way some group is going to be offended.
• United States
18 May 09
i also am a born-again Christian with pretty conservative beliefs. i do not believe that the homosexual lifestyle is moral or ok- i believe in the Bible and what it says concerning marriage. that being said, i have many gay friends. i do not judge them or hate them because of the lifestyle they have chosen. it is their right, and just because they choose to do something that i do not agree with does not mean i love them any less. Christianity is about loving people, but God also does not require that we be tolerant. i also think there cannot be laws against adultery and things like that because there would be no way to monitor something like that.
@angelsmummy (1696)
17 May 09
i am so happy to hear a christian say that! you would not believe the amount of christians i know that knock at my door trying to talk to me about gay relationships and gay marriage. I have many gay friends, its not a life choice its the way you are you cannot help it. I have yet been to a gay marriage ceremony but would jump at the chance to if i could!!