Why is gay marriage so "wrong"?

[DrFaroohk]

So yay for my state, after allowing gay marriage sometime earlier this spring, busybodied conservatives got a repeal sent to ballot and - big surprise - no more gay marriage.

I actually looked it up on yahoo. I typed in different forms of the question, and got basically the same results: "It goes against jesus!" and "Marriage is between a man and a woman and that's that."

But there's even decently intelligent people, people I know personally and have grown up with I know they've got pretty level heads on their shoulders, but they still believe that it's going to be some cataclysmic catastrophe if gays are allowed to get married.

I just don't get it. Every argument against it is something really, really, really, really stupid. Someone had to reach deep into their ass to pull some of these things out. Is there some argument I'm missing? I could totally support a ban if, say, gay marriage was proven to cause earthquakes. I'd be all for it! I'd be out there with my "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" sign.

I'm not even sure why I care at all now one way or another, except that I probably just feel guilty from my formative years of hatred, bigotry and discrimination. Come to think of it, 10 years ago I actually did vote no on some gay rights thing. I can't even remember what it is now. I was a way bigger asshole back then I guess.

[Stormraven]

The bitch of it is that the arguments against it are - almost without exception - the same ones that were trotted out in the '50s and '60s against mixed marriages.

[HYHYBT]

I don't think they tried the "they'll teach it in schools" nonsense in the 50's, though.

[Kalli]

When are we finally going to get past this completely retarded gay marriage debate, so we can all move on to being embarassed about how prejudiced we were "back when it was illegal"?

I've also yet to hear one valid argument against gay marriage that doesn't violate the supposed separation of church and state. How can a debate rage on for decades when one side doesn't have a single argument?

I'd like to ask anyone on this forum who is against gay marriage to please explain to me what your argument is, and I promise not to chew you out or call you names or anything. I seriously want to know; is it only a matter of Christianity? Because if so, it's invalid. If not, please tell me what it is.

Again, I promise your point won't be met with ridicule or hate.

[BroomJockey]

I'd like to ask anyone on this forum who is against gay marriage to please explain to me what your argument is, and I promise not to chew you out or call you names or anything. I seriously want to know; is it only a matter of Christianity? Because if so, it's invalid. If not, please tell me what it is.

Again, I promise your point won't be met with ridicule or hate.

http://www.fratching.com/showthread....iss+california

and the companion thread:

http://www.fratching.com/showthread....iss+california

Have fun, they're a long read.

[Kalli]

I hadn't read the first one, but have read the second. I was the last to post in it :P

Maybe I'm just incapable of comprehending arguments like Rubystars', but it seems to me that there simply isn't one. No matter how comprehensive and long (40 fsking pages) a thread gets, I still have yet to see literally one argument from the anti-gay camp that has made me think "that's a valid point".

It makes me really, really angry. I never used to know what it meant to be truly passionate about something before I was made aware of this issue. It's painful.

[guywithashovel]

Last night, just before I went to bed, I read an article about how the gay marriage repeal was probably going to win in Maine. Turns out, it did win, but at that time, it just looked like it was going to win. I actually got kind of depressed over it. I'm not gay, and only one person that I know is gay (that I know of, anyway). But still, it depresses me. I mean, if I really loved a girl, and the government told me that I couldn't marry her because some people's religions taught that my relationship with her wasn't "real" (or whatever nonsense they wanted to say), I would be really hurt over it.

Another thing that really, really bugs me about this is that the anti-gay marriage people are so smarmy and self-righteous about their attitudes. And if anyone challenges them on their positions, they actually have the audacity to play the victim and act like THEY are the injured party.

Finally, another thing about this that bugs me is that most of the people who oppose gay marriage identify as conservatives and say they want "small government" (yes, I realize I've talked about this before, but it bears repeating). Most of them are all against government-run healthcare plans. Most of them oppose the government protecting the environment. Most of them are dead-set against the government regulating the economy in anyway, too, because all of this is "big government" or "socialism" or whatever buzzword they choose to use. However, they have no problem with the government telling consenting adults they can't get married. That tells me that they only care about freedom for THEM, not anyone else. Heck, interracial marriage was illegal in some areas up until late in the 20th century because of people like this.

Though, I try to look at the bright side. These people are on the losing side of history. Historically speaking, discrimination never wins in the end.

[DrFaroohk]

The biblical reasons people list are just stupid. We don't live in a mandatorily christian nation! In fact our country is specifically designed to be the opposite. No religion and politics! Yet given that people still think its ok to base a law solely upon something the bible said.

My main complaint with the bible thumpers is that they are inconsistent, which to me says they are full of crap. I believe that if one is going to use the bible as their soapbox, they should be following ALL of the bible. Right down to the slave beatings, sister fuckings and ritual sacrifices. I don't believe one can just pick and choose from a source like that - its either all in, or all out. Only citing it when its convenient for you seems like a major fallacy or something.

[RecoveringKinkoid]

They ARE stupid, but even if they wen't, basing a law like that on single interpretation of a single religion is outrageously wrong.

I am Christian and I think it is absolutely outrageous the amount of flagrant disregard for the Constitution and for the separation of church and state.

And the anti people think that "Steve" slogan is sooooooo damn clever. It is stupid, it is ugly, and it makes me sick. Is that in the bible somewhere?

[Cats]

Banning Gay marriage Is NOT going to stop people from being gay, so what does a ban on it actually accomplish anyway? If the gay lifrestyle is against your beliefs, okay fine, but it's not going to stop it from happening. They aren't hurting you, and if they're happy, why can't they just be left free of the ridicule? No one has to like it, but I don't think it's right for other people to tell others what they can and can't do behind closed doors as long as it's consensual and any parties involved are able to provide said consent (and im my opinion, that goes for any relationship/sexual act).

I had friends in high school who either were gay, bi, and bi curious; some of them I knew before they really discovered that orientation they actually were. And you know what? The ones who 'became' gay (as in discovering and accepting they were), didn't change one bit as a person based on whether the person they wanted to fuck had a penis or not.


I also HATE the double standard where many men think lesbians are hot, but men being gay is so wrong and are thusly opposed to gay marriage either way. It's either "wrong" in your opinion or it isn't; you can't just base the issue on what you can jack off to.


So yeah, in short, I really do not understand one bit why it's supposedly wrong. I think having lack of common sense and having bugs shoved up one's ass is wrong, but I'm not going to go try to enact laws and oppress people as a result of my beliefs just so it'll make ME happy.

[DrFaroohk]

Sometimes I like porn with lesbians in it!

[BroomJockey]

I hadn't read the first one, but have read the second.

It was mostly meant as demonstrating the one time we'd had people seriously defending marriage as a heterosexual institution. Anyone who believes it now is going to be gun-shy, your promises of lack of ridicule notwithstanding.

[Cat]

I will never understand the argument for gay marriage being "wrong," meh.

If people wanna get married, it doesn't affect me (unless I want to marry one of the people involved, then it gets dramatic)

[Arcade Man D]

I am Christian and I think it is absolutely outrageous the amount of flagrant disregard for the Constitution and for the separation of church and state.

What's really funny about that one is that a lot of the initial idea for separation of church and state came from various Christian congregations (Anabaptists and Quakers, especially.)

And the anti people think that "Steve" slogan is sooooooo damn clever. It is stupid, it is ugly, and it makes me sick. Is that in the bible somewhere?

No, it's not. At all.

[Pedersen]

And the anti people think that "Steve" slogan is sooooooo damn clever. It is stupid, it is ugly, and it makes me sick. Is that in the bible somewhere?

Sadly, it actually is very clever. It rhymes. It's simple. It's easy to say. It's short. It conveys their entire position in something so short that it barely even qualifies as a whole soundbite.

So, yeah, it is definitely clever. The followers may be morons, but the leaders of these groups are far from being morons. Believing that they are morons is why their opponents keep losing: Their opponents underestimate them time and again.