VERY STRONGLY FOR gay marriage. Not civil unions either, gay marriage. If two consenting adults love each other, what right do we have to tell them they can't enjoy the same benefits as heterosexual couples? There is no argument against gay marriage that doesn't come straight from the bible...and the bible is not meant to the best basis for our system of government.

Devil's Advocate:


You do realize that marriage usually entails some kind of religious ceremony, right? That would mean allowing homosexuals to get married as Christians, when the Bible explicitly describes homosexuality as a sin against God.

What's wrong with giving homosexuals the same exact rights/privileges/tax breaks as people who are married except just calling it something else so the church doesn't have anything to do with it?


But as a Christian, don't you think you should vote the way you think Christ would want you to vote? Not for tolerance but for righteousness in the eyes of God.

^roflmfao.

i think the worst part of that is the notion that all christians are sin-less and perfect, despite their discrimination and intolerance and judgements and their opinion that 'murder for the lord is O.K!'

those things are fine,
but homosexuals??  the people that don't choose who to love (just like straighties but with the same gender)?  eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeewwwwwww!  sin! how deplorable!


and really, the issue of gay marriage is mostly semantics anyway, because no one protests a commitment ceremony.  people still are homophobic, but the political issue often comes down to the term (a good reference point would be the VP debate - 'they deserve the same rights, but not the title'), which is rather juvenile to me.
people aren't going to change who they are, and homosexuality has been around for millennia (greeks are a good example: sappho & the isle of lesbos, pederasty), so for people to still be afraid of and deny rights to gays is pathetic.

Sorry to burst the bubble, but check it out-

http://www.carm.org/questions/homosexuality.htm

Here are the actual passages from Bible.com-

Lev. 18:22

Lev. 20:13

1 Cor. 6:9-10

Rom. 1:26-28

Now what say you?

disregarding Leviticus ( Leviticus is painful to read because it's boring AND because it's so horrible), I will start with 1 Corinthians 6:9-10

ok the passage in the NIV says this:  "Do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God?  Do not be deceived!  Fornicators, idolaters, male prostitutes, sodomites thieves, the greedy, drunkards, revilers,robbers -- none of these will inherit the Kingdom of God!"

I also read it in The Message, a ... more interpretive book which isn't so much a direct translation (but is similar, in my opinion, though many 'purists' see it as a load of crock. it's easy to read, and gets me more involved than the regular Bible, so I dont' think it can be all bad).   I read the passage from King James, but I don't really like King James' version - just because it's the oldest translation doesn't mean it's the most correct.

anyway,  I also read the preceding chapter - it was mostly discussing a man who was sleeping with his father's wife, and how this lustful act is condemnable and the Corinthians need to bring it into the public and let Jesus judge.  It also speaks of damnations, etc.  Also, I don't really see homosexuality being spoken of specifically in this  case,  perhaps male prostitutes automatically means homosexuality, but sodomites in this case does not mean bum sex people.  So you have to keep in mind that the prostitutes and sodomites are being spoken of in the idea that they are being promiscuous and acting out of lust and not love, and yes, that is sinful -- I don't think any Christian will argue with you there. 
and sure a lot of gay people do act lustfully - as do so many straight people!
God hates that - lust!  God does not hate love.  if God is a loving God, then how can He hate love?

The Roman's passage is a little different. it does speak of men with men and women with women.  But again, if you read the surrounding text you'll see again that Paul and by extension God are upset with the Romans because of sexual promiscuity and LUST.  Again! 

I see no issue with homosexuality, any more than with heterosexuality.  I don't believe that God hates people the way that He made them.  And I think that a person should be able to marry the man or woman of his or her choice, barring obvious bad genetic matches, like incest b/w first cousins and lower (beyond that go for it, the genetic similarities aren't enough to create too much more risk of recessive-diseases coming out in offspring).  No holds on gender at least.

Why would anyone disregard Leviticus? That makes no sense.

Sometimes meaning is lost in translation, but not every time. Sure, the King James version might have a biased interpretation but that doesn't mean it's completely different from any other.

Feel free to reference another translation (bible.com houses numerous versions) where it says something that indicates otherwise. :]