Same Sex Marriage

Sunday, Miss California might have thrown away the chance to become Miss USA. She certainly did not get “fabulous” Perez Hilton’s vote. While I could sit here and talk about the legitimacy of an event that uses Mr. Hilton as a judge, I do think the spectacle raised a good issue that seems to be getting hotter and hotter because now Iowa and Vermont have legalized same sex marriage.

I wrote about this topic a while ago and if anything my belief that we should allow two people to enter this kind of union regardless of sex is even stronger now.

To even enter this discussion I now ask people the following question. Do you believe that being gay is a choice or innate?

The gay people I have talked to have always told me how difficult a live as an openly gay person can be, and that many people would not chose that life. While there has to be exceptions to every rule, for me it is the way that you are born. From what I have read, science tends to back that up also. I have formed this opinion over years and friendships, however the thing that tipped the scale over was that most gay people I have talked to believed were born that way. People like Ted Haggard might believe that those “impulses” is something that can be “cured,” but I think it only leads to pain and deceit.

I believe that fighting to keep people from getting married is a waste of energy. Proclaiming that it should be only between a man and a woman is a pretty weak argument in today’s world. I understand that government sees the potential for children as the basis for the language in marriage law, but I certainly think that more and more people chose not to have children but still enter the covenant of marriage.

I think conservatives should really concentrate on how to keep marriages together before they start telling other people what to do or not to. Divorce to me is a way bigger problem than same sex marriage. The only marriage prevention I would like to see is letting people that are too young or unprepared for the commitment enter into marriage. Educating people before they get into marriage I think would prevent a lot of divorces, maybe even discourage some from even entering into them, but this is a topic for some other day.

Perez Hilton is someone I don’t particularly like and actually think he helps fuel the whole celebrity culture that swallowed what used to be pop culture. However, he does have a point when he says that Miss California should be trying to unite rather than to give her personal opinion when giving the Miss USA stage. Same sex marriage should be legal for many reasons, and we need to start making this a human issue and not a gay issue. Homosexuals are humans and should be allowed the same rights.

14 Responses to Same Sex Marriage

  1. I was thinking of posting about this, more from the standpoint of whether it was fair to even ask such a polarizing question to just one contestant and having a judge base his decision upon a difference in personal/religious beliefs. But, I totally agree with you on the issue itself.

  2. It seems like in Perez’s mind it was a pretty easy to answer question, as in queue background music “It should be up to each state to decided what should happen and that is what makes our country great!”

    I have been amazed by the pageant world here in the US and its subculture feel. Back in Colombia, it seemed to be a lot more popular and something everyone kind of watches (or at least they used to.)

    The whole intelligence vs beauty discussion is also an interesting one, but I have stayed away from it recently because I don’t really have a frame of reference since I don’t know many people in the entertainment industry, and kind of don’t care to either. Not sure if we can call her dumb because she did not really answer the question given to her and rather came back with an opinion… plenty of people fall into that trap sometime, myself included.

  3. Hey log, i was watching the today show this morning and was thinking about how confusing it must be for some religions when it comes to the topic of homosexuality. you have many stories like Sodom and Gomorrah and they seem to conflict with the love everyone doctrine. i think we love to place people in groups. its the same as the black, white, hispanic thing. Until everyone is willing to just be people we wont get past this. Its just really rather ridiculous to sit there and say who or who not another person can be in love with. Its an individuals choice whether they were born that way or not is irrelevant in my opinion. Another person’s life is essentially there own to do with as they please.

    I hope one day there will be know labels. a person can just be human. but I don’t see it happening anytime soon.

    has a plus size woman ever won that title? has anyone that one ever went on to actually do something for america? Just asking cause i really don’t know.

  4. I’m with Becky on the appropriateness of the question. Miss California’s response was rather tepid and reasonable. It’d have been different if she had gone out of her way to say that homosexuality is a moral abomination. She gave it with class and dignity. She gave the same answer that a majority of Californians gave when they had the opportunity to vote on the issue. I disagree with her, but she should not be considered a lesser person for that.

    Regarding Gay Marriage vs Divorce, the problem there is that there isn’t much that they can do about the latter. No-Fault Divorce is here and the “damage” (as they see it) of it can’t be undone. Gay Marriage, though, they can stop before it starts. Again, I view this as misguided because I don’t see Gay Marriage as a threat to the institution, but it’s an issue independent of divorce.

    As far as whether homosexuality is hereditary or a choice, the evidence is inconclusive. And it could be neither. It could be something that some people (in their psychology or DNA, there’d be no way to prove) have that has an external trigger. If it were purely biological, it would be demonstrated with identical twins (where there is a correllation but not an absolute overlap). As you point out, it doesn’t make sense as a choice because it’s a choice that so few would make. I am doubtful that there is any single cause. That said, I don’t think it really matters. I don’t think that social acceptance should hinge on the article of faith that it is purely biological.

  5. First off, Miss California’s answer is what it is. I thought that it was suppose to be the delivery and poise of the contentant’s response, not the actual answer itself that mattered. This was suppose to be one of those, “there is no right answer” responses, right? The fact that Hilton reacted with such disgust at her answer just showed how intolerant of other people he is. Personally I applaud her for speaking up with an answer that she knew wasn’t going to be “politically correct” or 100% popular. The question itself was meant to polarize.

    Are people born that way? I have leaned both directions over the course of my life and I am not positive either way. It seems there are physical characteristics that they are born with and it seems like there are also cultural influences as well. I currently feel like everyone has a tendency toward certain behaviors. But what makes us different or human, is that we are not 100% instinct. We can control impulses and innate behaviors. I may be a very angry person by nature but it doesn’t justify my behavior of beating up every person that makes me mad or killing everyone around me. We all go against our primal instincts every single day, otherwise the planet would be in total chaos.

    What about marriage? First, I don’t think the government should be involved in it at all. Having said that, marriage by its very definition is between a man and a woman since the dawn of time. Perhaps civil unions are the best solution but the phrase “gay marriage” doesn’t make any sense at all to me.

    @Rob –> …”how confusing it must be for some religions when it comes to the topic of homosexuality. you have many stories like Sodom and Gomorrah and they seem to conflict with the love everyone doctrine.”

    According to the Bible, God destroyed these cities because of their incredible wickedness. The homosexuality displayed in the story was just one of the issues, not the only one. Similar is the story of Noah and the flood. The world was destroyed for the same reasons. In each story, good people were found and spared. The “love everyone” doctrine as you refer to it, would be the second greatest commandment given by Jesus: Love your neighbor as yourself. It does not conflict with these other stories for a number of reasons. In Soddom and Gomorrah, God had made the decision to destroy those places, not man. The second instance would be our command from God on how we are to treat each other, with love. Just because we love each other does not mean that we simply tolerate any and every behavior. I’m not loving my brother a whole lot if I condoned him drinking himself into oblivion. I’ve heard it said, “Hate the sin, not the sinner”.

  6. It is time to pull the shenanigans card on Mark.

    Soddom and Gomorrah I can totally see where even by some very low percentage, “good people” were spared… however, bringing up Noah’s ark is just too extreme for this discussion. Spared a very small group of people on that one… I would love to get into this discussion (which has been fun in the past and I believe was one of the ones that got me in trouble in my religion class) but this is not about biblical genocide… and if it would have been effective we would live in the ultimate utopia.

  7. hey mark, my main point was only that there are quite damning remarks throughout the bible about gay people as well as love on another remarks and the 2 seem to be at odds to me. Please take this as an opinion of mine and not a fact. I am wide open to any information that might help explain why this is not just hate speech.

    leviticus 20:13 for example. “If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination; they shall be put to death; their blood is upon them.”

    in my eyes that is hatred for no other reason than being a homosexual. if a homosexual was to be one of the most caring turn the other cheek generous accepting person on this planet it seems that god would still want him to be murdered. am i wrong in thinking this goes against the general theme of christianity. Or is it though shall not kill unless they are gay? I can do more research but this is not a one time statement in the bible.

    I agree that homosexuality was not the only reason that god destroyed sodom. But i still think the bible has many verses that place homosexuality in a light that is not congruent with Love thy neighbor.

    Is there a scripture that explains what about homosexuality is bad?

  8. I also applaud her answer. The irony of it is she spoke her mind and is now a social media pariah because of it. I guess she didn’t get the memo to go along with the vocal minority and give an ambigous/popular answer. Obama is against same sex marriage…where is the outcry on that? Clintons are against same sex marriage….I believe it was Bill Clinton who made it lawfully clear that it’s a man and woman (marriage).

    The point on innate– no one knows, only the gay person knows and that thought process of getting to ‘know’ if they are or learned or born gay is their own…conclusion. It really doesn’t matter, does it? They, like others make conscience decisions to ‘be’ who they are everyday.

    The contestant clearly is getting the big irony stick and doesn’t deserve it.

    I do like that our government has not gotten involved with it and let it take it’s course on a local level (State) and to be decided by voters not politicians.

  9. Log, you are calling Shenanigans on me?? What is this, South Park?? =) By using those examples, I wasn’t trying to imply that wiping them out was the cure all or anything. I’m not sure if that is what you were thinking I was saying. I was just trying to differentiate the decision was up to God, not man in those cases.

    @Rob –> Before I respond, I just want to say that I appreciate your response. You are asking valid questions and doing it in a respectful way. Not everyone does that when discussing issues like this! =)

    To start, this is kind of a lengthy theological discussion that is hard to sum up in a few paragraphs but I will try to address your direct questions. So, first off you need to make a distinction between Old Covenant and New Covenant or Old Testament and New Testament if you prefer. The OT is the law given to the Jews by God. This would include the 10 commandments as well as others (like the ones you are referring to). The laws were often very harsh and homosexuality wasn’t the only offense that was punishable by death. Adultery was another one I believe. Does that make it “hate speech” against the cheating spouses? We can only guess why certain violations of the law were punishable by death and others were not. Let me offer a guess though. A lot of the laws were given to keep the Jews “clean” or pure. The body is the temple and God did not want them defiling the temple. Since very strong language is used in the passage that you quoted, “an abomination”, I’m guessing this was particularly offensive to God and therefore warranted the penalty. To give you an interesting New Testament example, members of the early church were asked to sell off their property so they could collect the money and share everything. I believe the couple was called Annanias and Saphira, they told everyone they had, but they really didn’t. The husband was called in and asked if he really did sell his property and when he said he did, he was struck dead instantly. Later, the wife was called in and asked, when she said the same thing, she was also struck dead. Why so harsh a punishment by God for that? I believe it was circumstances. When the church was just starting out, they couldn’t have people that were dishonest or a corrupting influence. Maybe they could have caused others to turn away? Only God knew and that is perhaps the answer to questions like these.

    The second part of your question has to do with Christianity. I don’t know how familiar you are with the bible so let me explain that when Christ came (as the son of God) he placed everyone under the “new convenant” or new law. Again, I won’t get too in depth because this is really a month long bible study we are talking about here! So, turn the other cheek, love thy neighbor as thyself are many of the commands given by Jesus. In a lot of ways, he made the laws more strict. For example, in the OT, the command was “Thou shalt not kill” and “Thou shalt not commit adultery”, right? Well, Jesus said, that anyone who HATED his brother committed murder in his heart and anyone who LOOKED at a woman lustfully committed adultery with her in his heart. WOW! Talk about raising the bar! Also, Love your enemies?? Dang, how hard is that?

    Your last question was is there a scripture that explains why homosexuality is considered bad. I think I pretty much touched on that but I’m guessing any unnatural acts like that were considered bad. Many of the commandments were also there for the people’s own good. Things like dietary laws, and dealing with diseases etc. The Jews at the time were much healthier than many other groups because of God’s laws. During the Middle Ages, this came to haunt them because when others were getting sick and Jews weren’t, people started blaming them and persecuting them!

    Consider this: God is the parent and we are the children. Would you as a parent not slap the hand of your child that was about to put their fingers into a electric outlet?? Sure you would. Would the child understand why? No. Not until they were much older, right? God ultimately wants the best for us. Often we don’t understand a lot of scriptures and commands, etc. But as we become spiritually mature, as we study the bible as a whole and see how God works in people’s lives for the better, we “grow up” and understand that just giving free reign to do whatever we want whenever we want probably isn’t the greatest idea! =)

  10. Mark,

    No dude, I was not implying that at all! just that I don’t think all the “good people” were spared, unless if we talk about “good people” being a less than 1% minority.

    Interesting you took it that way though! lol

  11. Hey log thanks for bringing this up. and mark thanks for your response. it is not often I can ask questions and receive answers that don’t lead to finger pointing and what not. Appreciate your input Mark. I totally agree with what you were saying about the church just getting started and even could see how if mankind is just starting homosexuality could be seen as really counter productive when it comes to procreation. I am not quite yet ready to concede the point on the new testament being harsher. true now instead of committing the act just thinking it is a sin. on the flipside it is only a sin and not an abomination nor an instant death sentence. I can definitely agree to disagree on that one!

    I try to stay respectful of others beliefs and if i offend its never intentional. I have a long way to go on the spiritual maturity side, and reading between the lines of the bible seems to side track me constantly. I am finding some interesting things in the nag hammadi library and the books held within as i try to form my own opinions on what i believe.

  12. I am concerned about the number of people here who imply that the person who knows most about someone’s condition is himself.
    More specific to the topic: The process of determining the rightness or wrongness of a condition should not consist only of accepting the testimony of her whose condition is being questioned.

    Also, to Logar and those who responded: I know this is a lot to ask, but please carefully define to a practical extent each word of questionable meaning; by attaching meaning to words, having words tangled in a knotted web of culture, and then having meaning extracted from the words by others who read this, the central concepts represented by the original words are seen entirely differently, sometimes even oppositely, by the end party.
    I see this happen too much, and it has happened many times in the above text. This is why I don’t argue online. lol

    Oh, and there is one other question I’ve wanted to ask. I will ask it here, since there seems to be people in discussion here: Assuming this definition of marriage, essentially two consenting and rational human adults(18+?) with some degree of commitment, would it be possible for a M/M couple to marry each other even if they don’t have erotic feelings for each other? I would assume yes? So, for example, would I be able to marry a man, even though I’m considered “straight”? I do have committed, loving relationships with men, so I just wanted opinions of where the line is, or however one might explain such situations.

    Thanks! I look forward to your many and diverse replies!

  13. Patrick, thanks for confusing me :) you are making it a habit :) but to answer your question.

    I do think that erotic involvement plays a huge role on marriage, however, asexual people can enter the covenant of marriage in my opinion. It is a commitment to give your life to that other person, and in turn making it legal would grant that person access to for example making life support decision of the other is terminally ill, or right to a house owned together rather than it turning into state property… that to me makes it almost necessary to sanction such relationships even if it is just through legal unions.

  14. @Log –> This discussion could go on for a while….I like it! =) A few thoughts: Specifically in the story of Soddom and Gomorrah, Lot pleaded with God to save the city if he could find anyone righteous. He couldn’t. Lets look at the actual passages:

    Genesis 18: 20-
    20 Then the LORD said, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous 21 that I will go down and see if what they have done is as bad as the outcry that has reached me. If not, I will know.”

    22 The men turned away and went toward Sodom, but Abraham remained standing before the LORD. 23 Then Abraham approached him and said: “Will you sweep away the righteous with the wicked? 24 What if there are fifty righteous people in the city? Will you really sweep it away and not spare the place for the sake of the fifty righteous people in it? 25 Far be it from you to do such a thing—to kill the righteous with the wicked, treating the righteous and the wicked alike. Far be it from you! Will not the Judge of all the earth do right?” 26 The LORD said, “If I find fifty righteous people in the city of Sodom, I will spare the whole place for their sake.”

    Two things here stand out to me: 1) in verse 20, “The outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is so great and their sin so grievous”. That is some pretty strong language, that it wasn’t just a few people that stole a candy bar at the local store, but “so great and grievous”. 2) Lot appealed to God’s justice and God was willing to be merciful but none could be found.

    http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=1&chapter=18&version=31

    @Rob–>I wasn’t exactly trying to say that the NT was more harsh than the OT, just giving some examples of how the standard changed and in some ways could be more difficult to achieve. Here is a good scripture that illustrates this: Hebrews 8:7-10

    7″The time is coming, declares the Lord,
    when I will make a new covenant
    with the house of Israel
    and with the house of Judah.
    9It will not be like the covenant
    I made with their forefathers
    when I took them by the hand
    to lead them out of Egypt,
    because they did not remain faithful to my covenant,
    and I turned away from them, declares the Lord.
    10This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel
    after that time, declares the Lord.
    I will put my laws in their minds
    and write them on their hearts.
    I will be their God,
    and they will be my people.”

    I’m not sure what you mean by “reading between the lines of the bible seems to side track me constantly”. I think it is more of reading and understanding the entire story across a few thousand years that can sometimes be difficult. I know some people that can pick one verse out of the bible and say, “that is just stupid!” without even considering the time it was written in, the context of the paragraph it was in or actually doing any analysis of it. You are right, it is hard to get that spiritual maturity without a whole lot of study!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Go to top