Defense of Gay Marriage From a Christian Worldview

[sleepthroughthestatic]

I wrote this paper for school, figured it wouldn't hurt to get outside perspective/discussion on it. Irrelevant note: I am writing this from the perspective of a staunch Christian, I personally don't know what I am.

In Defense of Homosexual Marriage from a Christian Worldview

Legal gay marriage is quickly shot down by Christians, not necessarily due to homophobia, bigotry, or any of the inflammatory words sometimes slung around by staunch gay-rights supporters. But rather, the Bible is clear that gay marriage is wrong. Most Christians believe the necessary extension of this is to be strongly against the legalization of it. However, the purpose of this essay is to demonstrate a Christian may be in favor of the legality of gay marriage while remaining wholly consistent with a fundamental Christian worldview.

For many people, it is very difficult to separate things they wouldn’t do themselves from whether or not something should be legal. Many religious people quickly jump from “my religious text says this is wrong� to “this should be illegal� and fail to see the distinction. The reality of the matter is that there is a huge distinction that many religious people recognize and accept on an intuitive level, but do not rigorously apply the logic on a conscious level and to controversial political matters. For example, a Christian will readily admit the necessary legality of religious freedom for religions other than their own--very few would deny a Hindu the legal right to practice Hinduism. Yet practicing religions other than Christianity is in stark contrast to the Bible. The reality of a fallen world is that not everyone will agree with each other, not everyone is a Christian, and laws must strive to reflect this reality in an unbiased way in order to maintain a civil, free society. When determining if something should be legal, the question is “should others have the right to do this?� and not “would I do this myself?�. Any other way of looking at the law leads to places like the Middle East, where it is illegal and punishable by law to have beliefs that do not line up with the Muslim faith.

So the question is, “should gay people have the right to get married?�. Answering yes or no need not be a religious or moral statement, it is primarily a governmental issue. One can still believe homosexuality is a sin, yet recognize that in a free society, people should be able to do things you don’t agree with. The United States is a free society. So, right away, it appears gay marriage should be legal. However, as most Americans understand, there are limits to freedoms. One cannot simply murder whom they please because America is a free society. If murder was not illegal, there would be societal chaos and absolutely no protection from harm for citizens. Restrictions are in place in order to protect the rights of others. So the next question would be “would legalizing gay marriage infringe upon the rights of others?�. The answer to this question is a simple one, gay marriage is between two consenting adults. It does not infringe upon the rights of others.

Around the time this realization begins to sink in, people begin screaming about the “sanctity of marriage�, polygamy, or even pedophilia. Any straw that can be grasped at is firmly waived in front of the face of Christians, and they are told that if they disagree they are somehow endangering society and violating their faith.

The sanctity of marriage is indeed a very important matter. For Christians, marriage should be about the unification of two people into one flesh, serving and honoring God together. This is a fantastic approach to marriage and one that should be dearly held. However, it again boils down to a fallen world needing to function in a civil manner. Not everybody who marries sees it as a matter that God is involved in. People should have the right to dedicate their lives to each other, and have it recognized by the government, even if they are not Christians. Christians do not claim that atheists shouldn’t be allowed to marry, or Jews, or Muslims, or any other faith or lack thereof. Yet, any non-Christian marriage would strictly violate the Christian interpretation of what marriage should be. However, most Christians recognize marriage as a right that people should have--even if their view of it doesn’t directly correlate to those who are marrying. At a governmental level marriage is simply the legal recognition of two individuals dedicating their lives to each other. That’s all it needs to be, and all it should be. Gay people should have all the legal ramification that marriage has for anyone else. The “sanctity of marriage� as an argument against homosexual marriage is abusing a valuable Christian concept and making it a veiled political weapon, taking it places it needn’t go. The absurdity runs deeper, as those same people beating the drum about the sanctity of marriage have no problem with the legality of divorce for non-biblical reasons, which would violate the sanctity of marriage as well. If Christians decide that the Bible is the authority on what should be legal regarding marriage, any non-Christian should be in a “civil union� and any Christian seeking divorce should only be legally allowed it in very extreme circumstances. This line of thinking is, quite obviously, not conducive to a free society and would not work in a fallen world.

The other arguments, that involve issues such as polygamy and pedophilia, are perhaps even weaker. Polygamy is an issue that can apply to heterosexual relationships, and there is no reason to bring it up as an exclusively homosexual-related matter. Polygamy is an entirely different issue with it’s own set of consequences and matters to deal with. Gay marriage is only about the marriage of two gay individuals, and the only people bringing up polygamy are the opponents of gay marriage. Pedophilia marriage as an argument against gay marriage is completely faulty--the obvious fault being that it is not between two consenting adults.

The duty of Christians is not to legislate their beliefs. The Christian Kingdom lies in Heaven, and not this world. This world is fallen, and it is necessary for Christians to recognize that fact and understand that in a fallen world, people will not always agree with Christian ideals. It is their right to deviate from Christian rules and thinking, because without that right--there would be no free will. Legal issues are matters of society at large, and the government--not an issue of which religion it happens to line up with. It is time for Christians to realize that though they may not agree with homosexual relationships, the right should be there--and with that right comes the right to marry, as it does with any other people who wish to. The Christian focus is to glorify God through the Body of Christ, and to bring others to Christ. The Christian duty is not to make anything that does not line up with the Bible illegal.

[99percentatheism]

Discrimination has no place in the laws of our nation, especially discrimination based on religion.

You realize how absurd your statment is? Religions by their very nature discriminate. You can't say you are a Buddhist only you qualify. Etc., etc., etc..

Gay rights are human rights guaranteed by the constitution, and they should not be taken away by anyone.

Huh?

No one is taking away what has never existed.

[99percentatheism]

So the Muslims are your god's answer to liberal abominations. Interesting theory. Does that mean your they got it right and you got it wrong?

Why are there so many atheists answering a Christian OP?

I also don't need to bash Christianity. You are doing a splendid job of displaying how a religion that is apparently based on love is by the overly zealos so easily transformed to one where everything circles around hatred.

Anything Goes is the antithesis of love. It is though the very foundation of evil.

I am sure Jesus would be proud of you.

Actually, as an atheist, you are not sure about anything Jesus wise.

Muslims make like 0.6-0.8% of the US population I am sure they will overtake us and force their values on us any day now.

One Iranian Nuke can change things in the blink of an eye.

I love the way history mocks the secularists of the 21st century. As if cell phones and credit cards make us any different than the degenerate civilizations of the past.

Maybe you should buy a gun (as a good Christian you probably already own one) and go to the next zoo and shoot all Bonobos. With all the gay Bonobos god surely made a mistake and you ought to end them.

Isn't it interesting that it was YOU that compared Gays to promiscuous animals in a Zoo?

[99percentatheism]

I can come up with several ways Christians could defend gay marriage.

Says one more atheist to a Christian.

We live in a secular society and should not push personal views on others. People should chose their religion instead of being forced to follow into the rules of one.

Like forcing everyone to call us by our favored sex acts as "gays and lesbians and bi-sexuals" do?

Christians have already been though the "interracial marriage is ungodly" arguments fifty years ago.

You do realize that Black people and White people are of the same race right?

Do they want to play the same game again with the same arguments again and have it turn out the same way? Just look ahead and realize in the end, Christianity will do what it did for interracial marriage.

The no-no of interracial marriage had the African-Muslim-European Slave culture to thank for that. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Homosexuality is a sex act. Not a ethnic group.

It will claim that it was never denied in the Bible and past Christians misinterpreted the Bible.

Heresy is what you are describing. (That is why anti-Christian secularists are so happy to ram the gay rights thing down our throats.) We've seen them come and we've seen them go. The homosexual thing has stalked our Church for centuries on and off. Those of us that don't drink the secular Kool-Aid we'll survive this plague as well.

Stop being salad bar theists.

Obviosuly we aren't. We are "literally" folowing the teaching of Jesus that marriage is a man and a woman.

The salad theists are the ones that fear being insulted by the godless and the corrupt.

Why is the sin of homosexuality worse than the sin of sloth or gluttony?

So you are REALLY employing the two-wrongs make a right tactic? Seriously?
All you're doing is proving how wrong gay behavior is.

We don't see Christians kicking fat or lazy people out of church.

We don't see them kicking homosexuals out of the Church either. Last time I looked, no one was cheering on the lazy and the junk-food junkies. Either.

Why focus the hate on just one type of sinner?

HATE is supporting the sinner to STAY in their sins. Do the math. Love is standing your ground on what sin is and what it does to the Church universal when it is cheered on within it. It gets anti-Christians telling us how to be Christians!

Why aren't Christians protesting outside of Red Lobster shouting at people to stop the abomination?

Why would they do that? Food has been dealt with theologicaly and allowed. The gay sex thing stayed bad, bad, bad.

If you like to prove things for yourself, grab a New Testament and find out.

Realize that gay marriage is not in the Bible.

You want to repeat that until your pals saying that we honest Christians are hate-filled for saying that, are not hate-filled at all. Just honest. Homosexual marriage is NOT justified in Christian reality. You have to lie to teach that it is OK.

All that could be pulled out is some passages to kill gays and some commands not to be gay.

But you, as an atheist, are telling us to celebrate gay-ism? Wierd.

So if you are not going to kill them and if you have decided not to be gay, then the Bible is silent on gay marriage.

There is only one kind of "marriage" in the New Testament. Per Jesus. Man and woman.

If that's your logic, then marrying a pig is OK as well. I mean a real pig. The Bible is silent on that as well. And, some STD's came from sex with animals so you can't say it's never been done.

There is no passage like "Well, if you are not going to kill them, then don't let the ones living together call their union marriage."

I don't give a super nova if two same gender people want to live their lives together as pals. But to say that we Christians are somehow bigoted or hateful because we oppose that AS Christians . . . that's hate filled.

Realize that a Biblical view of marriage is now what conservatives and preachers say it is.

Per Jesus. The Conservative Preacher. And, many other conservative preachers in the New Testament letters.

The Biblical view of marriage involves rapists marrying their victims, killing women who have premarital sex and having sex with your slaves. It is not the romanticized "Leave It to Beaver" or "The Brady Bunch" marriages.

Yawn

Please, now, post what JESUS says a marriage is? AND in context. Jesus was preaching about DIVORCE to a bunch of other religious guys. So, the pro-gay crowd cannot say Jesus was ambiguosu an WHAT a marriage is comprised. Man and woman. No charge of bigotry otr hatred can stick to a Christian that will not support gay aims and goals.

Reinterpret the Bible to fit modern society.

Uhhhh yeah. Like REDEFINING marriage to fit humanism's say so?

You got a mirror?

Say that the Old Testament stuff was just for the Jews and not for Christians.

You seriously do not know that ALL of the "Christians" were once ALL Jews????

Say the New Testament stuff was misinterpreted.

That would be your gay marriage heresy promoters. Not honest Christians that won't reinterpret the Bible for modern times.

The stuff about man lying with man being against nature could mean that straight people should not act gay.

Are you seriously positing that if you are gay that your digestive track magically becomes sex organs?

Logic and reason are not on your side here.

Or it could mean that it is talking about pedophilia.

Pederasty sir. Not pedophilia. "Gay history" is replete with pederasty. Through and through. Up to and including this very moment. Harvey Milk (Darwin rest his his decaying mass) had pederastic relationships.

Or it could mean not to do pagan orgies (if you read the context around it).

A gay bar scene you mean? AIDS did not becoming epidemic in the Gay Community with monogamous marriages. And I doubt that gay marriage will do anything to slow the promiscuity of the Rent Boys culture.

And again, seriously, you are lecturing a Christian on how to use the New testament on sexual holiness issues? Since the "marriage bed" should be kept undefiled, and the "marriage bed" is immutably a man and a woman, AND homosexual acts are detestable acts . . . well. let's just say that ignorance is not bliss.

[quopte]Or it could mean that Paul was homophobic just like he was sexist and we should ignore him for those backwards views.[/list][/quote]

You anti-Christians SHOULD ignore Paul.

Hint, hint.

[moniasaurus]

I'm just going to point out how hilarious it is that some people still believe homosexuality is a choice.
With they way a lot of people talk about them, why would anyone choose that?
Why would kids who grow up in a strict religious household 'choose' to be gay when they know it could been being disowned by their parents?
Why would they 'choose' to be gay, only then to be refused the right to marry the person they love?
People against gay marriage need to mind their own business, seriously.
And yes I know it may be 'against your religion', but Christianity and other religions have evolved in some ways to accept things that they never used to accept.

[dusk]

So the Muslims are your god's answer to liberal abominations. Interesting theory. Does that mean your they got it right and you got it wrong?

Why are there so many atheists answering a Christian OP?

How does that answer anything. You seem to be unable to comprehend how much you fear or gays and islam and just about anything clouds your judgement. You make a pact with one demon if it serves fighting the other. A Christian would say you have lost your way brother.

I also don't need to bash Christianity. You are doing a splendid job of displaying how a religion that is apparently based on love is by the overly zealos so easily transformed to one where everything circles around hatred.

Anything Goes is the antithesis of love. It is though the very foundation of evil.

Anything Goes the Antithesis of love? You seem to define love in your very own way. I guess here we found the reason you can work this all into your distorted form of Christian faith.
Hitler was also completely certain about his believes:
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was his fight against the Jewish poison. Today, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed his blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow myself to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice."

I hope you understand someday that focusing all your energy on the so called evil breeds only diversion and hate. And those are the true anti-thesis of love and relationship/community.
The gay people are much closer to what Jesus was aiming for than fundamentalists governed by fear and driven by hate (towards evil).
Hate is hate regardless if what you hate is evil or not. If I hate Hitler because my grandparents died in a KZ it doesn't make it anything else but hate. As far as I understand the teachings of Jesus he wanted people to offer the other cheek and not strike back. He wanted people to love each other not hate even if there was reason to hate.
An Atheist can regard it as justified hate a true Christians should hate justified hate as much as any other kind, the way I was taught by Christians and understand the NT.

Actually, as an atheist, you are not sure about anything Jesus wise.

Not 100% sure maybe but if one is 100% sure he is just a million times more likely to be wrong. An Atheist can still read the bible and know just as much objectively about the dude than you.

Muslims make like 0.6-0.8% of the US population I am sure they will overtake us and force their values on us any day now.

One Iranian Nuke can change things in the blink of an eye.

Yeah sure if some terrorist might get his hands on a nuke he can make us change all our values and force anti-gay legislation on the western civilizations. One nuke won't change a thing in that regard. The only reason terrorists hold so much power is because the people pay them too much attention. If the media would ignore them and the people not shit their pants there would be no reward in it for them, it would be entirely pointless.
I am not saying we can entirely ignore them but you shouldn't help them by building on the fear they want to create. You only help them if you hold such fool notions.

Isn't it interesting that it was YOU that compared Gays to promiscuous animals in a Zoo?

I do but do you realize I regard those bonbons as a by orders of magnitude better creature than some fundamentalist hate preacher whose teaching circle around fear, hate and diversion.
I but meant to point out how ridiculous the assumption is that being gay is in any way unnatural and therefore trying to put in law the anti-gay legislation in a secularized society.

I'm just going to point out how hilarious it is that some people still believe homosexuality is a choice.

Some aspects are hilarious others are just sad.

[Quath]

Like forcing everyone to call us by our favored sex acts as "gays and lesbians and bi-sexuals" do?

I am not sure what you mean by this. Most GLBT refer to heterosexuals as "heterosexuals" or "straight." Sometimes they may jokingly call us "breeders." But as far as I can see there is no word people are being forced to use, so this baffles me.

You do realize that Black people and White people are of the same race right?

Very much so. But this was not apparent from the Biblical worldview. The trial judge in the case that led to Loving vs Virginia (which made interracial marriage legal) said "Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix."

The no-no of interracial marriage had the African-Muslim-European Slave culture to thank for that. Not the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Homosexuality is a sex act. Not a ethnic group.

Christians back then would disagree with you. Here is a good website of the Bible verses used to justify making interracial marriage illegal.

Homosexuality is a sexual orientation. For example, you can be a vigin homosexual or a virgin heterosexual.

Obviosuly we aren't. We are "literally" folowing the teaching of Jesus that marriage is a man and a woman.

The salad theists are the ones that fear being insulted by the godless and the corrupt.

But you ignore the marriage laws of forcing a rapist to marry his victim. Or ignore the marriage law that says a non-virgin bride should be killed before her parents. That is the essence of being a salad bar theist. You pick and choose which laws you want to follow and ignore the rest.

Why is the sin of homosexuality worse than the sin of sloth or gluttony?

So you are REALLY employing the two-wrongs make a right tactic? Seriously?
All you're doing is proving how wrong gay behavior is.

I am showing that Christians have singled out a single "sin" as something worthy of notice while all the others are ignored. Why that sin? It is more of a question for Christians to ask themselves to see if they understand their own biases.

We don't see Christians kicking fat or lazy people out of church.

We don't see them kicking homosexuals out of the Church either. Last time I looked, no one was cheering on the lazy and the junk-food junkies. Either.

Eight year old boy is kicked out of Catholic school because his parents are gay. Baptist convention kicks out a church that accepts gay parishioners.Gay man talks about his preacher kicking him out of church.

We don't see preachers calling up members of the church and telling them to stop their slothful, vain, prideful ways or they are out of the church.

Why would they do that? Food has been dealt with theologicaly and allowed. The gay sex thing stayed bad, bad, bad.

If you like to prove things for yourself, grab a New Testament and find out.

You can easily play the same game. You say something like "The Old Testament had a dietary law. But we have come to understand food well enough that we can ignore that part of the Bible now." You can likewise say, "The Old Testament had simplistic views on relationships because it pushed for population growth and tribalism. But we have a better understanding of relationships now so we can ignore that part of the Bible."

But you, as an atheist, are telling us to celebrate gay-ism? Wierd.

I am saying if you are in for a penny, then you should in for a pound. You already ignore laws on killing gays. Why not ignore the rest?

SThere is only one kind of "marriage" in the New Testament. Per Jesus. Man and woman.

So why ignore what God said about good marriages in the Old Testament? Looks like moral relativism. If you are for that, then keep going and you will find out that gay marriage is not so horrible.

If that's your logic, then marrying a pig is OK as well. I mean a real pig. The Bible is silent on that as well. And, some STD's came from sex with animals so you can't say it's never been done.

I advocate letting adults find happiness in any union with each other that makes them happy.

I don't give a super nova if two same gender people want to live their lives together as pals. But to say that we Christians are somehow bigoted or hateful because we oppose that AS Christians . . . that's hate filled.

That is like saying that you don't care if a white and a black are friends, just don't let them marry. And you assume people will not see that as hateful or bigoted.

Per Jesus. The Conservative Preacher. And, many other conservative preachers in the New Testament letters.

Jesus doesn't talk about homosexuality. These preachers also tell women to shut up in church and slaves to obey their masters. Why reject some of these and not others?

Please, now, post what JESUS says a marriage is? AND in context. Jesus was preaching about DIVORCE to a bunch of other religious guys. So, the pro-gay crowd cannot say Jesus was ambiguosu an WHAT a marriage is comprised. Man and woman. No charge of bigotry otr hatred can stick to a Christian that will not support gay aims and goals.

The "one flesh" thing is not about marriage. It is about sex because it is mentioned that a person can become "one flesh" with a prostitute.

Say that the Old Testament stuff was just for the Jews and not for Christians.

You seriously do not know that ALL of the "Christians" were once ALL Jews????

I assume you mean before Jesus. But modern Christians tend to see Judiasm as a different religion. I have talked to many Christians who believe the Old Testament was rules for Jews while Jesus changed all of that for people who would be Christians.

Are you seriously positing that if you are gay that your digestive track magically becomes sex organs?

Logic and reason are not on your side here.

I am not sure where you don't follow. I am saying that some people are born with a sexual desire for their same gender. You could interpret this passage as saying that people who were not born that way should not have same sex.

And there is nothing magical about the digestive tract being used in sex. It happens as well with heterosexuals all the time.

And again, seriously, you are lecturing a Christian on how to use the New testament on sexual holiness issues? Since the "marriage bed" should be kept undefiled, and the "marriage bed" is immutably a man and a woman, AND homosexual acts are detestable acts . . . well. let's just say that ignorance is not bliss.

I am offering some possibilities for Christians to have their faith and their conscience. I see too many Christians bothered by all the homophobia in their religion. These were some of they ways they have found to reconcile this.

Personally, I think religion is a hindrance towards good morality and this is just one example of it.

I also encourage you to keep up the fight along with Fred Phelps, Catholic, Baptist and Mormon churches. I have talked to many deconverted Christians who left because they originally thought Jesus was about love, but they later was told that the religion focuses more on the hate.

[Autodidact]

99: I'm sure there is nothing I would say that would penetrate the complete thought circle in your own mind consisting of bigotry, prejudice, religious superstition, fear of difference and an apparent lack of humor.

I see you watch FSTV and MSNBC. Cliche comebacks all in a row. Why not try to rebut my positions using the New Testament. THAT would be an academic rsponse sir. Not the leftie intimidation tactics.

After all, this thread is about the twisting machinations to justify the unjustifiable biblical position through a "Christian" perspective. As I'm sure even you know, gay goals exist outside of Christian life.
[/quote]
sure:
1. Jesus never says anything whatsoever on the subject.
2. Same-sex marriage is not prohibited anywhere in either testament.
3. Lesbianism is never prohibited anywhere in the Bible.
4. The best available translation of what Paul is upset about does not seem to be homosexuality at all.
5. Jesus seems to be promoting love, not hate.
6. What is clearly prohibited, by Jesus, is divorce and second marriage. Yet I never see you clamoring against that. Rather you have a problem with something that isn't prohibited at all. That's what causes me to conclude you are acting out of prejudice, not your religion.

btw, What's FSTV? I don't actually watch television.

Watch your assumptions; we do allow women to post here.

I do however, encourage you to continue to post your hate-filled screeds to the internet, as every one drives people away from your belief system. Good job.

You are entitled to your opinion of course. You know the addage about oinions I'm sure.

They are like replacements for real sex organs for the aberrant and deviant among us.

Please, don't ever stop spewing your charming perspective. You must find it hard to use an onion rather than a sex organ; please accept my sympathy.

[Autodidact]

Like forcing everyone to call us by our favored sex acts as "gays and lesbians and bi-sexuals" do?

So if someone tells you that she's a lesbian, you think in terms of sex acts? Wow, that's really an intensely sexual worldview. I think of who she loves. For all I know, she may have never had sex in her life.

If someone tells you they're married, do you think they're telling you about their sex life?

[Autodidact]

Discrimination has no place in the laws of our nation, especially discrimination based on religion.

You realize how absurd your statment is? Religions by their very nature discriminate. You can't say you are a Buddhist only you qualify. Etc., etc., etc..

Yes, religions, discriminate, but religions don't determine our laws. Our laws should not discriminate based on religion.

[99percentatheism]

I'm just going to point out how hilarious it is that some people still believe homosexuality is a choice.

All sex acts are a choice.

With they way a lot of people talk about them, why would anyone choose that?

Do I call canard, red herring or classic progressive-humanist comeback of pure relativism?

Why would kids who grow up in a strict religious household 'choose' to be gay when they know it could been being disowned by their parents?

Employing that logic defeats your propaganda. Evolution shows us that we should cast out the outcast.

Why would they 'choose' to be gay, only then to be refused the right to marry the person they love?

Sexuality and "love" very, very many times have nothing to do with each other.

People against gay marriage need to mind their own business, seriously.

same back at you for promoting it. Especially in the way Christians are bullied by gay activists to shut up and accept what to them is unacceptable. That's not irony, that is hypocrisy on the side of the so-called tolerance and diversity "social justice" shouting mob.

And yes I know it may be 'against your religion', but Christianity and other religions have evolved in some ways to accept things that they never used to accept.

THAT is up to the individual denominations to decide for themselves. So you are saying that we should applaud the Baptists from that Kansas Church that scream out that God Hates f---?

That's against the Gospel too, but maybe they were born with congenital condition to scream at homosexuals theologically? With your logic fully endorsed, anything can be excuse away.