S.T.A.G.E. said:
| wilco said:
I have to say, I am a supporter of gay rights but I think the argument of whether or not homosexuality occurs in nature is irrelevant. I don't even buy into the idea that people are born with a "gay" gene. That seems like an oversimplification of human sexuality. I really don't see why it should matter. If two straight men decide they want to get married, that is their choice. As long as both parties are consenting adults, the argument of whether people are born that way or whether it is a choice shouldn't even matter.
|
I'm not talking about a gay gene. I cannot confirm that. I am stating that the being gay is displayed by a lot of other species around us. Its already proven. We make it look like we as higher animals having homosexuals are making a sinful decision and religion is not really a proper way to explain the world around us on a scientific level. My point is...could a Christian condemn their dog for being a homosexual any more than a man? Marriage is a societal structure created by humans. I mean, any two people should be able to marry like you said. I agree, they should have the rights guaranteed to us.
|
Sadly, I wouldn't put it past a fundamentalist to do that. I used to argue with Christians in a similar manner but then I realized it was a moot point. Like you said, religion has no place in the affairs of the state. Christian's are free to condemn what they want, they simply shouldn't have the right to legislate based on those beliefs. Anyone who wants to hate gays is welcome to do so, they have that right, but they shouldn't have the right to tell consenting adults that they can't get married.
