By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mummelmann on 12 January 2013
Edit Thread
timmah said:
Mummelmann said:
contestgamer said:

Marriage IS a religious institution. You saying to argue without mentoning religion is like asking me to argue why the sky is blue without mentioning qny colors.

 

Marriage IS A religious institution!


Marriage in a church, mosque etc, yes. On board boats, before a judge, not so. Marriage is not something religions have the sole and supreme rights over, and that's a good thing.

OT: Why the hell should I be allowed to judge and decide who gets married and not? Its none of my business and doesn't affect my life in the slightest. What about people who marry their dogs together, marry manga figures, sex dolls and even statues, marry several people? Now that is weird, perhaps people who are offended by certain types of marriage should adress bullshit like that before they attack gay marriage.

I happen to know a lot of gay people, they're just people like everyone else and they fall in love like everyone else. If they want to get married, let them. This topic is like racism; born out of fear and ignorance. I seriously doubt that anyone opposed to gay marriage has ever spent any meaningful time with a single gay person.

Religious folks see marriage as a sacred vow between a man and a woman, with God as their witness, so to those individuals, it is a very deeply religious thing. Would you be on board with legal civil unions that give similar or same tax and legal benefits to same-sex couples? It would satisfy the need for same sex couples to have equal rights and protection under the law, while maybe keeping religious folks happy by keeping marriage (a term many hold sacred), defined as it currently is. To me this sounds like a good compromise. On that note, if a same-sex couple wants to have a religious marriage cerimony, I don't have any problem with them finding a minister who is ok with doing that.


A fine point, religion is, if anything, open to personal conviction and interpretation (the sheer amount of different directions and branches of every major religion should show as much) so I think that as long as the minister is fine with it, its no harm no foul. Individuals should not have their faith discredited and doubted simply because they don't subscribe to the exact same opinion and direction others do, the most important religious figures were usually reformers of some kind, people who brought their religions into new directions, often better suited for an ever-evolving society with a diverse population, many different cultural aspects and millions of personal convictions.

It isn't that long ago that we burned people in the name of god, no one can mourn over those days being long lost, one day we will look equally upon denying wholesome human beings the right to profess and show their love in modern society. Not judging others is a core subject of the bible, I find it somewhat strange then that the most judgemental people I have ever met are zealous followers of that very book who swear to those exact teachings.

One can perfectly well follow the teachings of jesus without being insufferable towards those around you, whether they be gay, atheist or belong to a different religion or belief. As long as you stay true and have a shot at salvation and show love and understanding to those around you, you're in the green the way I see it.

PS: I don't believe, nor have I ever believed in any kind of god or deity.