Federal judge: Arguments against gay marriage 'are not those of serious people'

[Glass*Soul]

Ever wonder why it was only 27% back in 1996? Is 18 years ago considered the "dark ages" or something?

Not the dark ages. No. Just prior to a tipping point.

A number of thing were already happening then, including the sheer number of GLBT's who were coming out, or were never even in the closet being out from their teens on. Almost everyone now realizes they have someone they already love in their family or circle of friends, or someone they admire in the field of entertainment or politics or science or whatever, who's not straight and whom they themselves want to see provided with equal opportunities.

Along with that, there is suddenly a lot more good information as to what it means to be GLBT. We are finally hearing more personal stories than we are generalized misinformation told to us by those who are out to put forth a negative impression. A lot of those stories are coming to us on the net.

I can't remember where I read this observation (on a blog probably), but in the years before President Obama came forward in support of gay marriage rights it was generally assumed that he was privately for it but was holding back publicly so as to not alienate voters. After he came forward, it was supposed by some pundits that he did so in order to garner the support of voters. That, in itself, is evidence of a vital tipping point having been reached.

When you look at the arguments against SSM marriage that we are discussing in this topic, you see that those making these arguments are not serious but are desperate. They are in the throes of losing the battle and are willing to hurt, not just GLBT people, but anyone in their way, including adoptive parents, those struggling with infertility problems, those who find love late in life, and just about anyone who is married because they love their spouse and desire intimacy, companionship, and a day-to-day witness to their lives. It is the last stand of people who have lost whatever heart and soul their quest may have had at the beginning. They're just slashing indiscriminately now and they know it.

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm going to encourage you again to do your research. The things you are showing as worrying about are not happening where these laws are in place.

Ok, I sympathize with with you in your situation. I myself was bullied in school, so I understand what it means to be marginalized. It's no fun.

Also, try to understand that when I post responses here, they aren't all directed at you. Many of them aren't. I'm responding to posts from several different individuals who are asking me questions.

But to you personally, I'd like to ask you what it is you're looking for? Are you looking to gain acceptance from society, or are you looking for a way to change something about yourself?

 

[Aldebaran]

When you look at the arguments against SSM marriage that we are discussing in this topic, you see that those making these arguments are not serious but are desperate. They are in the throes of losing the battle and are willing to hurt, not just GLBT people, but anyone in their way, including adoptive parents, those struggling with infertility problems, those who find love late in life, and just about anyone who is married because they love their spouse and desire intimacy, companionship, and a day-to-day witness to their lives. It is the last stand of people who have lost whatever heart and soul their quest may have had at the beginning. They're just slashing indiscriminately now and they know it.

Have you actually asked the people who are against it what their reasons are? If you're talking about the Christian community, such as the one on this website, then the reasons we have for being against it, are mainly that the basis of our core beliefs tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality. That's what it says in the bible and there are examples of it being condemned. Now what are we as christians to say or do in response when people who are advocating this type of lifestyle come here to do so? I imagine the answer is the same as if a christian went to a gay website advocating for christianity. It's not out of desperation. It's out of conviction. Sometimes we have to say what is not politically correct, or what we believe the majority might expect.

 

[Cute Tink]

Ok, I sympathize with with you in your situation. I myself was bullied in school, so I understand what it means to be marginalized. It's no fun.

Sorry to hear that.

Also, try to understand that when I post responses here, they aren't all directed at you. Many of them aren't. I'm responding to posts from several different individuals who are asking me questions.

I have generally just responding to our back and forth and leaving your other responses to other people.

I do sometimes get defensive when trans subjects come up, because I have seen far too much misinformation, usually from the same posters over and over and it gets frustrating. Don't mean to take that out on you. Sorry about being harsh.

But to you personally, I'd like to ask you what it is you're looking for? Are you looking to gain acceptance from society, or are you looking for a way to change something about yourself?

Most of my time here is enjoying reading various discussions and some people post very interesting articles.

When it comes to my status as a trans person, I only hope to educate people so that some of the misconceptions about us can be removed and maybe (just maybe) we have an easier time in society.

 

[revanneosl]

Have you actually asked the people who are against it what their reasons are? If you're talking about the Christian community, such as the one on this website, then the reasons we have for being against it, are mainly that the basis of our core beliefs tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality. That's what it says in the bible and there are examples of it being condemned. Now what are we as christians to say or do in response when people who are advocating this type of lifestyle come here to do so? I imagine the answer is the same as if a christian went to a gay website advocating for christianity. It's not out of desperation. It's out of conviction. Sometimes we have to say what is not politically correct, or what we believe the majority might expect.

Please try not to write as if all Christians share your belief that our shared faith is ineluctably opposed to equal rights for LGBT persons. Many of us do not, based upon our interpretation of scripture.

Also, please try not to write as if being gay and being Christian are mutually exclusive. There are many many gay Christians in the world. Some of them post right here on this very board.

 

[poolerboy0077]

Have you actually asked the people who are against it what their reasons are? If you're talking about the Christian community, such as the one on this website, then the reasons we have for being against it, are mainly that the basis of our core beliefs tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality.

That's not the topic of the conversation. We already know this. We're (supposed to be) discussing the specific argument advanced by defendants in the case: that there is some relevant connection between stopping gay couples from marrying and a state interest in procreation. That's the topic.

 

[Aldebaran]

I do sometimes get defensive when trans subjects come up, because I have seen far too much misinformation, usually from the same posters over and over and it gets frustrating. Don't mean to take that out on you. Sorry about being harsh.

Not at all. I think you're one of the more reasonable people here on this topic. I believe I let the heat of the argument get to me as well. My apologies for that.

Please try not to write as if all Christians share your belief that our shared faith is ineluctably opposed to equal rights for LGBT persons. Many of us do not, based upon our interpretation of scripture.

Also, please try not to write as if being gay and being Christian are mutually exclusive. There are many many gay Christians in the world. Some of them post right here on this very board.

I understand that there are people who call themselves christian while at the same time are gay. I'm sure a thread will come up someday (if it hasn't already) that tries to discuss that idea. Personally, I just don't see it as valid, unless a person was gay and came to Jesus Christ for salvation and is still struggling with it. But I won't try to sidetrack this thread to get into that topic here.

That's not the topic of the conversation. We already know this. We're (supposed to be) discussing the specific argument advanced by defendants in the case: that there is some relevant connection between stopping gay couples from marrying and a state interest in procreation. That's the topic.

I know. But sometimes a person will give an example of something else as a comparison to the current topic, and then disagreement arises out of the comparison which then leads to separate discussions. It happens when a thread gets to be 31 pages long.

 

[Cute Tink]

Not at all. I think you're one of the more reasonable people here on this topic. I believe I let the heat of the argument get to me as well. My apologies for that.

Thank you

 

[Freodin]

Have you actually asked the people who are against it what their reasons are? If you're talking about the Christian community, such as the one on this website, then the reasons we have for being against it, are mainly that the basis of our core beliefs tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality. That's what it says in the bible and there are examples of it being condemned. Now what are we as christians to say or do in response when people who are advocating this type of lifestyle come here to do so? I imagine the answer is the same as if a christian went to a gay website advocating for christianity. It's not out of desperation. It's out of conviction. Sometimes we have to say what is not politically correct, or what we believe the majority might expect.

It is desperation. It shines clearly through all of your posts, and the "arguments" of the anti-gay crowd.

Homosexuality is not "normal" - in the sense that it is not a thing the majority of humans does. It can offend the self-image of many people. It can shake the simply, binary worldview that many people have.

Because of that, homosexuality and thus homosexuals were an easy target for the "concerned majority" to other, to push out, to harass, to bully, to persecute. (Something they share with atheists, for very similar reasons.)

But atheists and non-Christians have after all gained their equality under the law (at least in the "western civilization"). Though throughout the bible one of the main themes - the "basis of our core beliefs" - is the worship of Yahweh alone, the condemnation and persecution of any diverting kind of beliefs or even different worships of the same deity... there is no overwhelming drive of "Christians" to ban the freedom of religion... any religion.

The Christians know very well that on the one hand, they would open up themselves to persecution - real persecution! - if they started to ban "other" religions. And that on the other hand they simply do not have the power to make this happen. They have lost this fight long ago... for very good reasons.

And so now the "core belief" of (this kind of) Christianity has changed from "you shall have no gods beside me" to "you shall never accept any homosexual beside you". These Christians think that with homosexuality they have found a fight that they can still win.

But they are wrong. They have lost this fight also quite a while ago.

 

[CRAZY_CAT_WOMAN]

While I don't actually agree with the tone of what was being said, I find this all wrong...

Lies about "who you are" don't lead to marriages based on false pretenses, lies lead to marriage based on false pretenses. Aren't sure what you want? Simple, don't get married.

If you get married - for whatever reason - then you are obliged to your vows. Telling lies about "who you are," does not excuse adultery. You don't have to cheat just because you're not happy with yourself or your spouse.

Divorce is a choice you can make or not make, again. Family stress can probably be traced back to you (not literally...)

Using the same argument, we could argue that ALL infidelity is inevitably excusable by blaming it on your inability to be honest.

I know back in to the closet days. People did marry to please family members, So right or wrong it happened. I'm sure it still happens

 

[Glass*Soul]

Have you actually asked the people who are against it what their reasons are? If you're talking about the Christian community, such as the one on this website, then the reasons we have for being against it, are mainly that the basis of our core beliefs tells us that God does not approve of homosexuality. That's what it says in the bible and there are examples of it being condemned. Now what are we as christians to say or do in response when people who are advocating this type of lifestyle come here to do so? I imagine the answer is the same as if a christian went to a gay website advocating for christianity. It's not out of desperation. It's out of conviction. Sometimes we have to say what is not politically correct, or what we believe the majority might expect.

By the basis of your core beliefs, I take it you mean the Bible?

May I humbly suggest that the Bible is the agent rather than the basis of Christian beliefs? It may seem to be a small distinction, but I invite you to contemplate its significance. Just chew it over.

This next part is unconscionably long. I apologize. I hope you will read it all.

Let's add to the idea of the Bible as an agent the concept of canon. In a very specific sense, your canon of the Bible is the particular collection of writings that your tradition has come to accept as scripture. Other traditions may accept a somewhat different set, but let's lay that aside for now.

What may be more important to our discussion is your personal canon. By this I mean the books, passages and verses that are most familiar to you and that you can bring to mind most easily. Think of it as a tag cloud in which some passages are in enormous bold print, some less so, and some are not even represented--are below our radar even if we have been exposed to them somewhat. Even the most scholarly and learned Bible experts cannot hold the entire bible in their minds at once with a perfect clarity, nothing weighted, everything in it equally available to their thinking processes as to how it might all fit together in addressing some question or the other.

Now, add to that a lot of other stuff that tends to weigh as heavily and perhaps even more heavily than some of the teensier-tinier print of potentially applicable Bible passages in our clouds/canons. This may include things our old Sunday school teachers said and that we accepted long before we were capable of analytical thinking. It may include mostly the types of questions and discussions the people in our tradition have tended to have and leave out the ones they have tended not to have. It may include non-biblical sources that are far more culturally inspired than we might like. It may include things we accept as orthodoxy that others reject for equally strong reasons. Lots of stuff. Consciously and subconsciously brought to bear. That all goes to making our personal cloud/canon what it is--shaping it as something unique to each of us.

Let me go on to still humbly suggest (as this applies to me as much as anyone) that when we imagine we know and know fully what the Bible says about something, we probably are ignoring quite a bit that we shouldn't and weighting some things much more than we should. This says nothing about inerrancy or the fervency of our belief or anything of that nature. It is simply how our brains work.

Not only do we ordinary folks grapple with this, but everyone who has ever had a hand in translating or even copying the Bible has grappled with this, from ancient hand illuminated texts to the NIV. Now, you may believe that there has been divine guidance making up for this, which I'm not arguing yea or nay at this juncture, but the grappling with our inward, personal clouds/canons is always there. Always in play with our every approach to the scriptures.

I ran into this the other day. I just sort of sat and blinked and scratched my head for a moment. Leviticus 18:22 - Hope Remains: Homosexuality and the Bible

I looked up משכבי for myself: Morphix Dictionary The word can mean couch, bed or sexual intercourse. I'm reminded of the English word "bedded" which can mean innocently put into one's bed to sleep (I've bedded down the children. The campers bedded down.), or had sex with (...bedded a woman). You have to look at the context to figure out which meaning is to be used.

(BTW, the above is just an example for the purposes of this point I'm making, not a stand-alone argument pro or con homosexuality.)

Whether you see any wiggle room on the question of homosexuality when you consult your Bible depends upon your personal cloud/canon. One person's cloud/canon may weigh one of these possible translations much more heavily than the other and place the other completely under their radar, and for that person the Bible is clear--not because of an innate quality of the Bible but because of a quality of how our brains work.

 

[Aldebaran]

And so now the "core belief" of (this kind of) Christianity has changed from "you shall have no gods beside me" to "you shall never accept any homosexual beside you". These Christians think that with homosexuality they have found a fight that they can still win.

But they are wrong. They have lost this fight also quite a while ago.

You may think this if this issue is the only one you focus on. There is more to life than this one subject.

Actually, the core belief of Christianity is that Jesus Christ died and rose again and anyone believes on him for the forgiveness of their sin nature will have eternal life in Heaven. It is the culmination of many other events as written in the book we call the bible. We try to tell people about this, but it often gets sidetracked by other issues, such as "What about this or that, or these people, or this or that religion....." and then the topic often goes in that direction alone. Sometimes people only want to view Christianity in light of one of those particular topics and the way christians see them. I have no problem talking about those topics, but after awhile, it starts to seem as if christianity is "all about" supporting or rejecting a certain thing.

 

[Glass*Soul]

You may think this if this issue is the only one you focus on. There is more to life than this one subject.

Actually, the core belief of Christianity is that Jesus Christ died and rose again and anyone believes on him for the forgiveness of their sin nature will have eternal life in Heaven. It is the culmination of many other events as written in the book we call the bible. We try to tell people about this, but it often gets sidetracked by other issues, such as "What about this or that, or these people, or this or that religion....." and then the topic often goes in that direction alone. Sometimes people only want to view Christianity in light of one of those particular topics and the way christians see them. I have no problem talking about those topics, but after awhile, it starts to seem as if christianity is "all about" supporting or rejecting a certain thing.

QFT

 

[SFTS]

......and for that person the Bible is clear--not because of an innate quality of the Bible but because of a quality of how our brains work.

I really like how you are very articulate and well spoken in your posts. I think what you said is exactly right. Often we base what we believe, really, by what others who we look up to say about it, even if it is the Bible. As we get older, our beliefs and understandings change. I just want to quote a verse from a Dylan song, that describes it and even myself perfectly:

"Yes, my guard stood hard when abstract threats
Too noble to neglect
Deceived me into thinking
I had something to protect
Good and bad, I define these terms
Quite clear, no doubt, somehow

Ah, but I was so much older then
I’m younger than that now" (My Back Pages)

 

[Aldebaran]

By the basis of your core beliefs, I take it you mean the Bible?

May I humbly suggest that the Bible is the agent rather than the basis of Christian beliefs? It may seem to be a small distinction, but I invite you to contemplate its significance. Just chew it over.

This next part is unconscionably long. I apologize. I hope you will read it all.

Let's add to the idea of the Bible as an agent the concept of canon. In a very specific sense, your canon of the Bible is the particular collection of writings that your tradition has come to accept as scripture. Other traditions may accept a somewhat different set, but let's lay that aside for now.

What may be more important to our discussion is your personal canon. By this I mean the books, passages and verses that are most familiar to you and that you can bring to mind most easily. Think of it as a tag cloud in which some passages are in enormous bold print, some less so, and some are not even represented--are below our radar even if we have been exposed to them somewhat. Even the most scholarly and learned Bible experts cannot hold the entire bible in their minds at once with a perfect clarity, nothing weighted, everything in it equally available to their thinking processes as to how it might all fit together in addressing some question or the other.

Now, add to that a lot of other stuff that tends to weigh as heavily and perhaps even more heavily than some of the teensier-tinier print of potentially applicable Bible passages in our clouds/canons. This may include things our old Sunday school teachers said and that we accepted long before we were capable of analytical thinking. It may include mostly the types of questions and discussions the people in our tradition have tended to have and leave out the ones they have tended not to have. It may include non-biblical sources that are far more culturally inspired than we might like. It may include things we accept as orthodoxy that others reject for equally strong reasons. Lots of stuff. Consciously and subconsciously brought to bear. That all goes to making our personal cloud/canon what it is--shaping it as something unique to each of us.

Let me go on to still humbly suggest (as this applies to me as much as anyone) that when we imagine we know and know fully what the Bible says about something, we probably are ignoring quite a bit that we shouldn't and weighting some things much more than we should. This says nothing about inerrancy or the fervency of our belief or anything of that nature. It is simply how our brains work.

Not only do we ordinary folks grapple with this, but everyone who has ever had a hand in translating or even copying the Bible has grappled with this, from ancient hand illuminated texts to the NIV. Now, you may believe that there has been divine guidance making up for this, which I'm not arguing yea or nay at this juncture, but the grappling with our inward, personal clouds/canons is always there. Always in play with our every approach to the scriptures.

I ran into this the other day. I just sort of sat and blinked and scratched my head for a moment. Leviticus 18:22 - Hope Remains: Homosexuality and the Bible

I looked up משכבי for myself: Morphix Dictionary The word can mean couch, bed or sexual intercourse. I'm reminded of the English word "bedded" which can mean innocently put into one's bed to sleep (I've bedded down the children. The campers bedded down.), or had sex with (...bedded a woman). You have to look at the context to figure out which meaning is to be used.

(BTW, the above is just an example for the purposes of this point I'm making, not a stand-alone argument pro or con homosexuality.)

Whether you see any wiggle room on the question of homosexuality when you consult your Bible depends upon your personal cloud/canon. One person's cloud/canon may weigh one of these possible translations much more heavily than the other and place the other completely under their radar, and for that person the Bible is clear--not because of an innate quality of the Bible but because of a quality of how our brains work.

I've read through your entire post and checked the link concerning the verse in Leviticus. I'm not an expert or very knowledgable when it comes to translating languages, much of that is over my head. But I think the conclusion of the article starts to split hairs and tries very hard to come to a conclusion other than what seems to me to be obvious. I also think that the other verses in scripture that basically say the same thing in different ways supports the most popular interpretation.

 

[Queller]

Oh my goodness! If you want to find a thread about that, I'm sure you could find a great many of them if you just do a google search. I don't know if you'll find them on this site, but trust me, a great many websites will have that if that's what you're looking for. I won't waste my time repeating it here. No need.

Well, then don't claim the President has done something unconstitutional if you're not willing to pony up an example or two.

I haven't personally tried to legislate anything. All I've done is come here to discuss things. Sometimes people don't agree with me.

<God, help me deal with people whose only argument is playing semantic games.>

Let me try a different approach.

Do you believe same-sex marriage should be banned and why or why not?

 

[Manic Spinoza]

The post I was replying to was, "If you allow SSM marriages Christians will be persecuted because Christians find LGBT people icky."

If there was a question being asked, I guess I missed it.

Do you believe SSM should be legal and why or why not?

 

[Skaloop]

That's not the topic of the conversation. We already know this. We're (supposed to be) discussing the specific argument advanced by defendants in the case: that there is some relevant connection between stopping gay couples from marrying and a state interest in procreation. That's the topic.

And on that topic, I would be interested in hearing how the state's interest in procreation will be affected by the state's stance on gay marriage. Will allowing gay marriage cause a reduction in the rate of procreation? Will procreation rates increase if gay marriage is made totally illegal?

Because the way I see it, whether gay marriage is legal or not, Adam and Steve still won't be having any biological children of their own. But neither will it cause Adam and Eve to not have biological children of their own. So the impact of legal same-sex marriage on procreation rates is essentially zero.

 

[bhsmte]

The post I was replying to was, "If you allow SSM marriages Christians will be persecuted because Christians find LGBT people icky."

If there was a question being asked, I guess I missed it.

Let me help you:

Are you for protecting people from being discriminated against?

Do you feel, same sex marriage should be banned?

 

[bhsmte]

Really? It seems like it would be pretty hard to miss something you deliberately cut out of someone's post. Most people have to read the post to know which portions they don't want to answer and therefore need to quote-mine out.

Yep, kind of a pattern with him.