Gay People Against Gay Marriage

[Edrof]

On Facebook, (I know, I know) a friend posted this link to an article on the BBC's site. The friend is a Christian male, I don't know how strong his views are, but I think they include a fairly deep-seated anti-homosexual stance. I've no idea if he represents most 'modern' Christians in the UK, though (does he?).

I'm of the opinion that gay and lesbian couples can do whatever the heck they want, as long as in doing so they don't hurt anyone. If heterosexual couples can marry and have kids then so should gay and lesbian couples be able to.

Truthfully though, I have done little research into it - but are there really any non-religious, hard, rational facts against gay marriage?

 

[UK-AL05]

No. The majority of people who are anti-gay marriage when backed into corner, end up saying something abstract and fluffy like "it's against the fabric of society".

 

[elmarko]

Truthfully though, I have done little research into it - but are there really any non-religious, hard, rational facts against gay marriage?

None at all.

Just homophobia & bigotry, along with the church attempting to claim marriage as an exclusively religious ceremony (when in reality it's existed longer than Christianity if I recall correctly).

My thoughts are simply, I don't care what two people I don't know get up-to as long as nobody is harmed.

 

[StriderX]

Besides the logistics of a gay society, which is entirely impossible, i don't see how this has any rational issue for our society as it stands.

This isn't the thread for a rant about religious institutions.

Edit: Fair dos.

 

[weringo]

No. Whenever someone tries to turn it into a rational debate it usually looks something like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kx_VXceIeMM

 

[Sudden]

Gay marriage specifically, or gay couples adopting children?

If the former - I can't really think of any.

If the latter - I can think of a couple of potential arguments to be made.

That being said, i'm all for it and strongly believe that, as people above have said, people can do what they like as long as they aren't hurting someone (unless it's hurting someone I don't like. In which case, they should do something that hurts people I don't like ).

Oh and before anyone jumps on my statement - I don't believe that any potential arguments outweigh the general right of gay couples adopting.

 

[Edrof]

My thoughts are simply, I don't care what two people I don't know get up-to as long as nobody is harmed.

My thoughts too, really.

Would be interesting to hear from any Christians on the board, whether they are pro or anti.

 

[ps3ud0]

Im confused by the OP title and his post?

I think once you take out religion its hard not to be particularly bothered about something like gay marriage.

ps3ud0

 

[neodude]

To go off on a slight tangent. I have nothing against gay people but... The definition of marriage has always been "man and women". So by definition you can't have gay marriage. By all means have a ceremony/status exactly the same, but call it something different. Gayrriage?

It's like me trying to say a truck should be called a car because it has the right to be called that. Or that Red should have the right to be called Green.

Madness imho.

 

[semi-pro waster]

If any hard facts against gay marriage exist then I think they're in the figurative closet.

It shouldn't really come as a surprise that a group of often disparate individuals such as those that fit in the LGBT label who are principally only linked by sexual orientation would have some within it who oppose gay marriage though.

As elmarko says marriage is not a specifically religious institution and never has been, it might be the most common conception of it now but there are still thousands of marriages conducted at registry offices and other non-religious venues every year. If gay people want to get married then good luck to them, I don't see any good reason why a couple that love each other (usual caveats about non-harming and non-familial relationships aside) shouldn't be able to have that union recognised.

If it's the naming of this union as a marriage that offends then I'd be inclined to point out that given the divorce figures amongst other things it's not as if heterosexuals have been particularly great at demonstrating their belief in the sanctity of marriage.

 

[sports_brah]

I'm against homosexual marriage. I've got no problems with homosexuals but I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

This isn't to say that I don't believe that homosexuals should have rights and indeed they should, simply that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, to become husband and wife.

I think the furore around the whole issue of "homosexual marriage" is that it is the homosexual community trying to "normalise" themselves. They don't seem to realise that just because people are different that it is a bad thing.

A man having relations with a woman is completely different to a man having relations with a man or a woman with a woman. Not saying that one is necessarily more right (though reproduction etc it can easily be argued), just that they are different.

 

[Tunney]

Some people are against the institution of marriage completely. They feel the same way as David Cameron - that equal marriage strengthens, rather than weakens, the institution of marriage. If you're against marriage in general then you're very likely to be absolutely against equal marriage. That includes some gay people.

 

[elmarko]

The definition of marriage has always been "man and women".

Has it though?, or has it just occurred historically between "man & women", that's if you want to ignore the whole ancient Greek homosexuality thing (an era in which we get most of our basic moral & ethical principles from)

As elmarko says marriage is not a specifically religious institution and never has been

Indeed, I'm an atheist & I can get married.

 

[Tunney]

To go off on a slight tangent. I have nothing against gay people but... The definition of marriage has always been "man and women".

You might want to re-read the bible. In the Old Testament, there's plenty of polygamous marriages and God seems pretty OK with that.

The definition of marriage has changed over the ages. In fact, this country's church was formed over differences in opinion over the laws of marriage.

 

[sports_brah]

Has it though?, or has it just occurred historically between "man & women", that's if you want to ignore the whole ancient Greek homosexuality thing (an era in which we get most of our basic moral & ethical principles from)

Indeed, I'm an atheist & I can get married.

Ancient Greeks did not get married, they had homosexual relations but it was never formalised as married.

 

[weringo]

Ancient Greeks did not get married, they had homosexual relations but it was never formalised as married.

Just out of interest, how would you feel if gay couples were allowed the exact same rights as straight people in terms of getting married, but a gay marriage was in fact called something else, let's say "narriage"?

 

[hurfdurf]

No. Whenever someone tries to turn it into a rational debate it usually looks something like this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kx_VXceIeMM

What an idiot, can't actually formulate an argument, admits he can't, then profoundly misrepresents the laws based on incest.

 

[starfighter]

Having children is a very important part of your life, maybe more so than being with someone you are sexually attracted to and for that reason I think gay marriage is a bad idea.

(yes you can adopt etc but it isn't the same).

 

[RomanNose]

Am I the only one who thinks it would be pretty awesome to have two dads instead of a mum and a dad?

 

[Strife212]

Just out of interest, how would you feel if gay couples were allowed the exact same rights as straight people in terms of getting married, but a gay marriage was in fact called something else, let's say "narriage"?

What like civil partnership which we've had for ages?