Why not gay marriage?

Oh, great; another blog about being gay. What is this guy? Some kind of queer? As long as questions keep coming up in my mind about the confusing anti-gay defenses, the more I'm going to need to blog about it to help me better understand how and why these anti-gay activists think the way they do.

Today, the California Supreme Court ruled in favor of Proposition 8, continuing the ban on gay marriage in that state. A friend of mine said he wasn't surprised by the ruling. Back in November the people voted for it and it passed. It wouldn't make sense for the court to overturn a voter-approved proposition, wrong though it may be, because to do so would make people think that democracy doesn't work. I can see what he's saying, but at the same time, I'm saddened; not because of today's ruling, but because this issue went to the voters in the first place.

I have really tried to understand the anti-gay marriage defense. I have tried to find logic in their protests, their Bible verses, their actions. The more I look, the less logic I see. Instead, I see hypocrisy and double talk.

When I heard the news about Prop 8 in California, I started thinking, yet again, about this whole idea of the Bible's definition of marriage. Is it so clearly defined as people argue? I got out my NIV study Bible that I had in college and started looking up verses pertaining to marriage. One thing did become clear as I looked up the verses. Every single one of them were NOT official definitions. Not one! Instead, what I found were examples of marriage.

For one thing, all of the verses tended to start with one word: IF. "If a man marries a woman...", "If a man has recently married..." One verse actually said "For example..." (Romans 7:2-3). Are examples clear definitions as argued by the anti-gay marriage campaign? If I were to look up marriage in the Webster's Dictionary, would it say "For example, a man and a woman joining in union?" Actually, here's a fun fact! I did look up the word marriage on the Webster's online dictionary. Take a look at what I found.

As I looked at the "official" definition of marriage, I noticed that those were examples. So maybe an official definition is an example? Maybe those references in the Bible are "official definitions". If that is the case, then how do the people of today, who hold up these definitions of marriage in the Bible get around passages like

Romans 7:2-3 – For example, by law a married woman is bound to her husband as long as he is alive, but if her husband dies, she is released from the law of marriage. So then, if she marries another man while her husband is still alive, she is called an adultress. But if her husband dies, she is released from that law and is not an adultress even though she marries another man.

Woah! Does this mean that a woman who gets a divorce is a slut if she marries another man and her ex-husband is still alive?

Here's another verse I found interesting:

Hebrews 13:4 – Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral.


Nowhere in that verse does it say "Marriage between a man and a woman." It just says the word marriage with no "clear definition" of what that word means. Now it does say "sexually immoral" and I know that many would jump on that phrase and say "Right there! That's the case against homosexuality right there because the Bible clearly defines homosexuality as 'immoral'!" Okay, fine, even if you adopt that narrow view, I would still have to argue that it doesn't specifically say that a marriage is between a man and a woman. All it says is that "marriage should be honored by all." Interesting. Honored by ALL. Should ALL marriage also be honored? Just wondering.


I went to Google and typed in the words "gay marriage Bible". I was hoping to find websites that would tell me exactly how and where the Bible speaks against gay marriage. Here is the first website that popped up.


I thought this essay was very interesting. Not surprisingly, the author turns to the story of Sodom found in Genesis. Two angels of the Lord went to Sodom to find Lot and the men of the city followed them. They knocked on Lot's door and demanded that the two angels be sent out to them so they could have sex with them. Instead, Lot opted to send out his two virgin daughters and the men of Sodom had sex with them instead.


Okay, so here are my issues with this story and the defenses of the author of that website. First, how shitty is it that Lot sent his poor daughters out as replacements? This was the most holy man in all the city? This was the man that God sent His angels there to save? YIKES! Second, the men had sex with the woman. Well, if that's the case....they are they gay? I can tell you as a gay man, I have never had a desire to sleep with a woman. It just doesn't appeal to me. If I find a guy attractive and he sends out a woman and says, "Here, give this a try..." I'm going to walk away saying, "No thanks." So if those men of Sodom were such evil homosexual men, why were their sexual lusts satisfied by a couple of virgin chicks? They sound like creepy straight guys to me. Come to think of it, have you ever seen any pictures of angels? They look kind of....feminine, don't they? Could it be that these two pretty boys walked into the city and were mistaken as women? Just a thought.


So given all of that, is this as valid an example AGAINST gay marriage as the author of the website claims? In the summary, the author of the website lists this story under examples of the Bible "clearly" teaching that same sex marriage is wrong. But is this as "clear" an example as the author would like to believe? I find that hard to believe, myself.


To further discredit the list of Bible verses, under that same heading of the Bible clearly teaching against gay marriage, the author lists Judges 19:14. In my Bible, this is what the verse says: "So they went on, and the sun set as they neared Gibeah in Benjamin." Wow! That is very damning evidence against gay marriage there. I mean how can one argue against that? Clearly, that verse from the Bible is teaching that gay marriage is wrong! Right?


The author lists verses from Leviticus where, in another blog, I also pointed out other "sins and abominations" that Leviticus that today aren't considered sins.


Another verse listed under that same section as defense against gay marriage is Deuteronomy 23:17 - "No Israelite man or woman is to become a shrine prostitute." And the hard evidence against gay marriage is.....?


Another listed verse, 1 Kings 14:24 - "There were even male shrine prostitutes in the land; the people engaged in all the detestable practices of the nations of the Lord had driven out before the Israelites."


No Same Sex Marriage Biblical References in the Old Testament
The Bible clearly teaches no same sex marriage.
Genesis 19; Judges 19:14
Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13
Deuteronomy 23:17; 1 Kings 14:24, 15:12, 22:46; 2 Kings 23:7

These are the verses from that section. I took that directly from the website. NOT ONE of them specifically talks about gay marriage! Some of them, don't even talk about homosexuality! Do you get the feeling that maybe at some point the author got bored and wanted to pad the arguement a little by throwing in arbitrary verses?


There are other verses listed on the website, but as I look at them, they do not specifically address same sex marriage or the Bible "clearly" speaking out against it, as these people love to claim. I just don't see the validity of their argument. I can't find a single passage in the Bible that specifically forbids a man being able to marry a man or a woman being able to marry a woman.

There are, however, plenty of verses talking specifically about divorce and what an abomination that is. Yet there is a practice that is readily accepted in today's society. Gays getting married doesn't protect the sanctity of marriage, but it's okay for two people to get a divorce? Well, the Bible clearly states otherwise. Why is it that one is okay but not the other, especially when the other (gay marriage) is NOT clearly stated in the Bible as claimed?

The idea of Civil Unions has started coming up. In Washington State, gays have finally been given what we are calling "Everything but..." Gays in this state now have all the rights of heterosexual couples in marriage, we just can't call it marriage. While many see this as a victory for gay people in our state, I still can't help but see that they still want to see us as second class citizens. Fine! Go ahead and have your union, but you still can't call it marriage! Oh, but you will have to pay your taxes and your civil service just like every other citizen.

I am thankful to the people in our government who pushed for the recent legislation granting rights to gay people here. They have worked hard to get us that. It may not be exactly the same as marriage, but it is darn close. It's "everything but..."

Is it important that gays get the word "marriage?" I honestly don't think that it does. Sure, I just ranted in this blog about the semantics of the word. I guess in the end, what really matters is how the two men or the two women feel about each other. If their love is genuine, that's all that matters, isn't it? Do they have to call it marriage? I don't think it really matters.

My point in all this was to question the "logic" of anti-gay people. They throw out these verses from the Bible as damnable proof for their cause, but when you go and look at them, you find holes in the theory. More questions are raised than outright proof. Yet time and time again these verses are thrown into the argument as law. Those verses are held up as testament to the validity of the Bible while those other verses, the ones that speak against other things in practice today are ignored. That's selectiveness. They're just taking the verses that they think support their cause and "forgetting" about the other ones.

There is a word for that. It's called hypocrisy.

A New Crush

I've done it again and I really blame my friend Neil for sending me the link to the following video. It's over 9 minutes long, but it's worth it.



So, yeah, I have an unhealthy crush on Seth MacFarlane, now. I've been a huge fan of Family Guy and have always found him attractive whenever I've seen him interviewed. But hearing Seth say the things he did about gay rights and marriage..... Yeah, I'm completely smitten!

Here is an interview I found in The Advocate. Man, I love this guy!

Scare Tactic: RUN FOR THE HILLS!

And so we have yet another package of lies from a group calling itself Courage Campaign. I'm guessing the courage comes in having the balls to air this shit?

Take a look at the latest commercials now running in California:

https://secure.couragecampaign.org/page/contribute/TurnFearIntoHope

I guess I'm not understanding their message. Please explain to me exactly how two people of the same sex wanting to get married damages these people's lives? Are the newly-married gay couples inviting themselves over for Bible studies? "Oh, no! Mary, that newlywed gay couple just invited themselves to our Bible Study! Do we have enough cookies?"

What exactly is the threat here? I just don't get it! There's a storm gathering? The dark clouds are forming? Because gay couples want to get married? HUH? How are gay couples trying to bring issues into these people's lives? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it THESE people who are making this an issue and forcing it into people's lives? They were the driving force behind Prop 8 and they forced their closed-minded views on the gay couples who just want to acknowledge their relationships. The only ones making this an issue are these people with their scare tactic.

"My freedom will be taken away!" HUH? HOW??? If gays are allowed to be married you still have the freedom to go picket the wedding and we know these people will do it! They happily picketed the funerals of dead soldiers, claiming that God allowed them to die because America is gay friendly. What about a grieving family's freedom to mourn in peace? Or does freedom only work one way: their way!

How the hell does gay marriage affect the job of a California doctor? Is she performing marriages on the side? In exactly what way is her job being compromised? Is it the blood test or something? She feels uncomfortable testing two people of the same sex with a desire to get married? Fine, we'll go to a gay-friendly doctor. I don't want you sticking me with a needle anyway.

I'm so sorry that the New Jersey youth group can't spread their message of hate. Awwww. Poor kiddos! I'm sure it makes Baby Jesus cry, that you aren't allowed to use donated church funds to force political views on the world. As Jesus clearly taught, that is what church life is all about! Jesus DEFINITELY didn't teach love and compassion. Oh, no, his message was all about infecting the world with closed-minded thinking and fear. Oh yeah, Jesus was all about fear. And he preached SO much about those filthy gays. Go to your Bible and look up ALL the words in red that Jesus spoke against gays. I'm sure there there. No, really!

I'm sure that gay marriage is a hot topic in public schools. I bet those classrooms are just BUZZING with that information. Oh! And that whole science thing? BAH! What terrible messages those teachers are infecting our innocent children with. It's too bad that there aren't private schools we can take our children to that preach these closed-minded ideals we hold dear. It's too bad we can't home-school our children and shelter them from the horrors of the world so that when they grow up they will be unprepared to deal with the realities of the world.

HOW, HOW HOW does gay marriage strive to change the way these people live? We're talking about two people of the same sex who want to get married! How does this change your life? If you don't like it, do go to the wedding. Don't buy any gifts on the registry! Don't invite them to your block party! If two people being in love is THAT big a change to your life, then build up a wall around your home like you have your heart. What better way to block out the terrible love of two same-sex people!

I love that they call this a rainbow coalition. I'd love to talk to gay people who are running with this crowd. They must be those elusive gay republicans I keep hearing about. I love how this group claims to be all inclusive as they campaign to exclude gay people from getting married. Hypocricy, your table is ready.

"Coming together in love to protect marriage." Eh, that one speaks for itself. What can I saw that adds to the stupidity and falsehood of that blatently wrong statement?

There you have it, folks. Another attempt to thwart the love between two people. Constitution be damned. Once again the compassionate-challenged spread their message of hate, blankted by a false statement of hope and love.

One day I hope these people look back on these actions that they have taken and cry with shame. I hope they run to all the gay couples that they have hurt over the years and beg forgiveness. It's okay. We gay people are a compassionate people. Unlike you, we'll open our arms and accept you for who you are without judgement or hate.

In the end, that's really the kind of people we are. Hopefully one day you'll see that.