Wednesday, July 12, 2006

TBF response: Gay Marriage

Response to The Brian Factor
February 2. Topic: Gay Marriage.
I guess there are two main arguments against homosexuality: it's "unnatural", and it is verboten by God.

Well, for the first one, same-sex pairings have been found in numerous animal species. And since animals don't have the capabilities of reason and morality, they are simply following their natural instincts. Instincts which could be said to have been given by God. So, it seems like a pretty natural phenomenon to me.

The second argument has the premise that the anti-homosexual statements written in the Bible are the true words of God. My first rebuttal: the Bible was obviously written by humans, divinely inspired or not, and humans are (by definition) imperfect beings. Second: the scriptures have been translated and retranslated over centuries. How can a logical person believe that what the Bible says and means is exactly the same as what it originally said and meant, when the phrase "Polly saw a polliwog" morphs into "Bob likes linguini and balloons" in a game of Telephone?

Thirdly, if God is an all-powerful being, then why does he allow people to be homosexual? Does he just hand out this "affliction" like Lupis, Autism, and big noses? For that matter, why does God allow child molesters to be born and admitted into the clergy? Or allow sociopathic idiots to attain positions of power? Seems to me that genetic, emotional, and personality disorders are too various and random to be doled out by the Hand of God.

I, personally, don't buy the whole religious argument against homosexuality. And, unfortunately, the debate over same-sex marriage cannot remain secular because of the Christian fundies running the government.

Look, government guys, I understand that because of the benefits that legal marriage provides there should be some limitations. A guy shouldn't be able to marry a sheep for the purpose of insurance or inheritance. (Not that that makes any sense, unless the sheep is financially independent, but whatever.) (And what the hell is up with Mormon polygamy? How do their benefits work?) But I can't understand why two people, regardless of gender, shouldn't be able to make a legal commitment for their mutual benefit. Especially if they are monogamous and committed.

If you want to focus on the problems of secular marriage, why not focus your efforts on the phenomenon of serial monogamy? From what I've learned, it seems like kids whose parents have divorced and remarried numerous times are a lot more screwed up than kids who have been raised in a stable two-parent household, regardless of hetero- or homosexual parents.

Labels: , ,

3 Comments:

At 10:13 PM, Blogger Kevin said...

As a self-described Christian fundie, I object to the notion that Christian fundies run our government.
Also, your Biblical hermeneutics are greatly flawed.

 
At 10:15 PM, Blogger Kevin said...

Oh, one more thing. You are exactly right, divorce is a great scourge upon marriage. Many conservative Christian churches and organizations are working to curtail that divorce rate. I don't know of many conservative Christians who are against gay marriage and not divorce.

 
At 2:39 AM, Anonymous Tara said...

I agree with you. But then again, I'm not religious, and I follow the scientific nature more so than theological approaches. Monogamous marriage of staying with one person is dying out. I think that's why I'm afraid to get married. The idea of love to me is a foreign concept almost as I see divorce going on and on in our world. Anyway, I just stopped by since you're a Cap regular and am glad to see you have similar stance on stuff other than music!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home