DISCUSSION: Gay Marriage: Should it be Legal or Not?

All right conservatives, you have put out a call for a discussion on Gay marriage. Let’s have one. Right here. Right now.

In a story from CNN’s Political Tracker (and sent in by a regular reader; Thanks Skatha!), the National Organization for Marriage released a statement saying:

“She is attacked viciously for having the courage to speak up for her truth and her values,” the group said in a press release. “But Carrie’s courage inspired a whole nation and a whole generation of young people because she chose to risk the Miss USA crown rather than be silent about her deepest moral values.”

According to the group, the ad will call “gay marriage advocates to account for their unwillingness to debate the real issue: gay marriage has consequences.”

(Source: Miss California to star in TV ad from conservative group

As I said before, I applaud Ms. Prejean for having the courage to stand up for her ideology and to state the unpopular, non-PC view. This illustrates the power of the First Amendment of our great Constitution. Well done, Ms. Prejean.

However, I think the key word here is “unpopular.” Clearly there are many people, some say as much as 40% of the country, are ready to move forward, socially, and expand equal rights to everyone in our great country.

The principal nay-sayers are amongst the conservatives, primarily the Evangelical Christians who believe that the homosexual lifestyle is an abomination before God.

If any conservatives, or anyone against Gay marriage reads this, could you explain why Gay marriage has “consequences,” as stated by the National Organization for Marriage?

Some other questions I wouldn’t mind an answer to:

1.) What about legal Gay marriage threatens your rights?
2.) Conservatives, and Evangelical Christians in particular, have been called homophobic and hate mongers, with repeated statements that they are “following the word of God.” How can a loving and just God condemn an entire population, that He created, to death? Does this strike you as fair?
3.) Is there not room in the country for all sides to be represented?
4.) Do you feel it is a violation of the Constitution (separation of church and state) to make laws refusing civil rights to homosexuals based on religious ideology?
5.) Why do conservatives attack those they feel don’t know the Bible, as they did when Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana) stated that “Jesus loves you and your partner?” (Source: Religious right now trying to punish pro-gay speech

I would very much like to have an open and honest debate about these issues here. No snarky comments. No personal attacks. Just honest dialog. I reserve the right to bar anyone from the debate if they violate these rules.

Advertisements

About WonderGoon

WonderGoon is seeking enlightenment and questions everything.
This entry was posted in General, Politics, Religion, Social Observations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to DISCUSSION: Gay Marriage: Should it be Legal or Not?

  1. Pingback: DISCUSSION: Gay Marriage: Should it be Legal or Not?

  2. awfrick says:

    If I could also add a few questions for ant-SSM advocates:

    Would you support legislation bolstering anti-sodomy laws?

    How do you reconcile the fact that Christ himself never once spoke against homosexuality?

    The US was built upon religious freedom; if the GBLT community interprets Scripture differently than you about homosexuality, don’t they have the constitutional right to practice that version of religion freely without the interference of the government?

    That’s all, I look forward to the responses.

    Like

  3. Skatha says:

    You should pay a visit to LDK’s site. There’s a video post there which might interest you. 🙂 There’s a link on my blog to LDK’s blog.

    Like

  4. Skatha says:

    http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/30576142#30576142

    I find it extra-ordinary that she’s defending those nude photos when they were taken at the age of 17 as a minor individual in most states.

    S’okay to pose nude – for art or not – but not okay for me to be married.

    Like

    • WonderGoon says:

      It does smack of hypocritical behavior. The video didn’t say for whom the photos were taken; Playboy, Penthouse, Hustler or some other porn rag, but I’d be interested to know who took them and if that person is going to be prosecuted for child pornography or not.

      “Do as I say, not as I do.” Guess it works for anything.

      As far as her statement of “I am a Christian […]” goes, I don’t think there are many Christians who have been photographed in the nude when they are underage. Regardless of whether they are models or not.

      All-in-all, I think she is a VERY POOR example of a true Christian.

      As far as marriage is concerned, though, I don’t think it will be too much longer until the GLBT community has the right to marry throughout the country. We will get there despite these people.

      Hang tough.

      Goon

      Like

  5. Skatha says:

    Last night I caught the end of Left, Right and Center on NPR and want to applaud the remark of one of the members of the group who discuss issues. They touched on LGBT rights and at the end they give each person a set amount of time to make one final remark and this guy praised the fact that the cradle of our Democracy – New England – is leading the country into a new age of more rights for more individuals. 🙂

    Like

    • WonderGoon says:

      “One State and a time” should be the motto. It sounds like the Federal Government is kicking this issue back down to the State level, so that’s where the fight is going to be fought. I would dearly love to see the Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage lifted, but I think this issue won’t be handled until the majority of states have ratified gay marriage legislation and the President has repealed “Don’t ask, don’t tell.”

      As I said, we will get there, but it will be a hard fight along the way.

      As to NPR, I listen to “Wait, Wait. . . Don’t Tell Me” but I rarely listen to anything else. I will amend that and try to catch “Left, Right, and Center.” Thanks for commenting.

      Peace,
      Goon

      Like

  6. Mike says:

    1.) What about legal Gay marriage threatens your rights?

    —–It’s a funny thing, what people call rights. Few know what this actually means. Our ‘rights’ are guaranteed by the constitution, and specifically addressed in what is now known as the “Bill of Rights”. The first 10 amendments had to be added to the Constitution because there are few actual rights guaranteed in the original document.

    Constitutionally speaking, we have the right to do whatsoever we wish to do, so long as it does not break the law. That’s about it. So to say that lawmakers are removing rights is inaccurate, since once a bill becomes law, our rights on that subject are at that point established, and not before.

    This also means that nothing about being gay, or gay marriages can be for or against your rights, until law for it is established.

    For those whom those laws restrict activity they wish to do, these become violations of their rights. Attempts to remove those laws become violations of the opposite side’s rights. They can claim the ‘right’ to live in a country free of gay marriage. So long as the law prohibts this, they have a legitimate claim, biased as it may be.

    So long as these laws pass the constitutional review required of all laws, and are passed by the appropriate governing bodies, then the ‘rights’ in these cases are established. That does not mean it becomes philosophically right to pass those laws, however. In my opionion, law should only be passed to protect Life,Freedoms, and Property, in that order.

    2.) Conservatives, and Evangelical Christians in particular, have been called homophobic and hate mongers, with repeated statements that they are “following the word of God.” How can a loving and just God condemn an entire population, that He created, to death? Does this strike you as fair?

    —–The answer to the question here is fairly easy. The key is in the phrase ‘entire population’. The Gays among us are not an entire population, unless removed from the rest of our society. Speculativly speaking, if God sees Homosexuality as a detriment to society as a whole, then as a Loving and Just God, he must remove (condemn to death) the infection to prevent harm to the greater body. To say that the Homosexuals were created by God might also be false, as it is christian dogma that Satan may corrupt God’s works, and Homosexuality is seen as just such a corruption. Is it Fair? According to Christian teachings, if God says it, then it’s fair by definition.

    Not by my own definition, mind you. Nor do I personally subscribe to that view, even though I am christian. That disparity is why there is the phenomenom of “Crisis of Faith”. Should I ever meet Him, it’s on my very long list of questions to ask Him about the nature of the World, as it does not seem fair. However, I also believe that christians are not perfect, just Forgiven. As such, I’ll live my life and leave others to live theirs and learn or not from my own example as the bible teaches.

    3.) Is there not room in the country for all sides to be represented?

    —–Absolutly. However, the better question would be: “Is their room in the Human Heart for all sides to be represented”.

    That question varies greatly from individual to individual, and in many if not most cases, the answer is No.

    The country was founded on ideals of Freedom and Equality. Sadly, while most of us can Talk, few of us can Walk. There is an unfortunate trend in our behavior to attack that which is different from ourselves.

    4.) Do you feel it is a violation of the Constitution (separation of church and state) to make laws refusing civil rights to homosexuals based on religious ideology?

    —–As I discussed above, you can’t really violate or deny a ‘right’ by passing a Law. Your ‘rights’ are determined by the law, starting with the constitution and working its way down to local ordinances of your county and city. So long as any law meets that constitutional review, and is passed by the proper authority, rights cannot be violated.

    Basing those Laws on religious idealogy does not violate the constitution, except perhaps in spirit—which is very important in my view, but not in the Laws. You could say that making a Law against Murder is also based in religious ideology (Though Shalt Not Kill), however, the social need of such a law is clear despite its origin–in this case perhaps a bad example, as laws against murder perhaps predate the bible itself.

    The constitution calls for a seperation of church and state, but that does not preclude the making of laws based on the ideology of the church. Laws are put in place to define and protect society, and religion is certainly an important part of society as a whole. The Founding Fathers, and almost all of the voters of this country to this day, are or were christian. What other ideology would they base the law upon, given their background and intended audience?

    5.) Why do conservatives attack those they feel don’t know the Bible, as they did when Miley Cyrus (Hannah Montana) stated that “Jesus loves you and your partner?” (Source: Religious right now trying to punish pro-gay speech

    It’s the nature of being conservative. Conservatism is very much about being part of the Establisment, and the core of ‘the establishment’ was formed in an age when only the most extreem members of the left would admit to even being agnostic, much less anything that is not actually christian. Conservatism by it’s nature is very slow to change, so you still get a heavy mix of chistians among conservatives. Even among liberals you get a healthy sampling of christians, in a group that has acceptable rebellion as a core philosophy. Perhaps in another century or 3 we will see orthodox religion’s hold on politics erode to the point that it becomes a non-factor.

    Plus, we are not really talking about conservatives or liberals when we discuss what anyone said in the media—we are talking about extreme examples of motivated, agenda oriented attention seekers and politicians looking to get on TV, become famous, score points or please their backers.

    Like

What do you have to add to the discussion?

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s