Being that I am attracted to the opposite sex, I couldn't imagine living in a world where the social norm was same sex attractions. A world that told me that that was my choice and that I could chose to be gay if I wanted. I can't chose to be attracted to the same sex any more than a gay man can chose to be attracted to a woman. The ideal of falling in love and sharing your life with someone is something that drives almost every human being. I can't tell you what determines a person's sexuality, but I can tell you that it's not my place to deny them the same rights that I would be able to enjoy. Gay Marriage is not about destroying the "sanctity" of marriage; it's about allowing equal rights for all. I think we would all agree that a black man has every right to marry a white woman. This was not the case a mere 40 years ago. This is an issue about civil rights, not about religion or morality. If you believe it's a sin to be gay, that is your right, but it is not your right to ban what you feel to be questionably immoral. If you wish to ban gay marriage on a moral stand point, then do you also wish to make laws against premarital sex and adultery? Separation of Church and State was created for a reason. So the question is not, will Gay Marriage destroy the "sanctity" of marriage; but, does every human being deserve the same civil rights that I am blessed to have?
What does the legalization of Gay Marriage mean to you?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"your right to ban what you feel to be questionably immoral"
ReplyDeleteYes it is. Everyone has just as much a right to ban something as you do to allow it.
" then do you also wish to make laws against premarital sex and adultery?"
I never thought of that, but if it came up in legislation, then yes, I would have to be in favor of them, there is no way I could allow myself to have these things voted on against my beliefs. The only reason we fight these things is because society is questioning them, and therefore your point in using this statement is lost.
Yes, please allow for the Separtation of Church and state, however don't barr the members of churches from their rights.
And it is true that all should be entiteled to certain civil rights that homosexuals are clamoring for, but as for a union between the two, I cannot abide by that.
If I sounded rude at all, I apologize, I'm just trying to get my point across
Thank you for your post.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that you were born in the wrong century or the wrong country. Perhaps you would be happier living in Iran where such acts as adultery and premarital sex are punishable by stoning. We all have our standards and our personal moral standings, however these cannot be forced upon others. No one is denying you your rights. Allowing others that are different from yourself the same rights does not somehow diminish your own. Laws are there to protect citizens and to protect their rights, not to inhibit people based on your religious beliefs. Doing so would directly contradict the separation of church and state, which you say you support. If you believe in God then you believe that God granted us all freewill. He didn't force us to follow him, he allowed us that choice; so the fact that you would like to take that freewill away through laws and legislation is quite shocking.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI never said what kind of punishment there would be for them, and to say that death would be the punishment, that is outragous. And that response was uncalled for.
ReplyDeleteI am not forcing my beliefs I am applying them to how my life is affected.
The right I was talking about was my right to vote on the subject. And that I would be unable to vote in favor of allowing someone to do what I believe to be sin. They have the right to believe it is not sin, that is fine by me.
Laws are there to protect citizens and their rights, correct, and I have a right to change the direction of a country as well. If the Christain beliefs are the majority then so be it, but if homosexual beliefs are the majority, then so be it as well, we will merely have to adapt and move on. There are other laws out there we don't believe in and are adapting to. Though, yes there are some extremeists out there, but don't sign them on as the entire stereotype.
I believe in the Separation of Church and State as in the direct control of Church with state, as the founding fathers feared with figures such as the pope (who I do not follow btw), but still allow those of any faith to believe and vote accordingly that still falls into that category of this seperation.
As per freewill, God allowed for freewill, but the condoning of it, and your twisted view of tolerance, is NOT what God called for. I am not taking away freewill, but rather attempting to stop the abuse of it. If a child has the free will to steal a lolipop out of a convience store, what would your response be to that? Don't take away his freewill? I view both homosexuality and stealing as equal sin (as no sin is greater than the other) and therefore punishable to death in the end(not physical death mind you). You have a right to disagree and I respect that right, and thus in no way wish to "force" it on you anymore than you wish to "force" the allowing of homosexuality upon me.
I don't mean to be a bother, but you are forcing your beliefs. Telling other people how to live their lives when, in REALITY, it doesn't actually affect you, is forcing your beliefs. Yes, you have a right to vote for anything you'd like to, however the legality of even having a proposition to ban basic human and civil rights to people is just wrong and unamerican.
ReplyDeleteLiberty and Justice for all? Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness? How are these words forgotten when they are said so often? Your problem here is that you have confused Democracy in its original and truest application with majority rule. America was founded to "protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority". THAT, my friend, is Democracy and that is what America is. Just because you can find a majority of people to agree on something does not give you the ability nor the right to force that opinion on others. Slavery often comes to mind. The majority of Americans were fine with slavery before and during the Civil War. Does that mean it was ok? No.
This isn't about separation of church and state, even. This is about separation of want and need. In a legal and governmental issue and debate, you cannot randomly toss in sin and religious views because they suit your argument, just as in a religious debate, I can't randomly call your mother a wildebeest and throw mashed potatoes at you. They are entirely different arenas. Say what you will, but this is the core of the issue.
I know you're going to nitpick this to death, and that's fine, that's what you do. However, what I do is make sure that we maintain a proper system of checks and balances in this country and ensure that people, when they do use their freedom of speech, understand that they need to know what their talking about in order to invoke that right.