As a Christian myself (albeit one who tends to be a bit un-Christian in his online behaviour - something I do indeed need to work on), I think I understand where they are coming from, somewhat.

What I think isn't being expressed by a lot of the participants in the anti-gay marriage debates is the fact that we're actually against is not the fact that two people who engage in a lifestyle that we disagree with want equal rights. What we disagree with is the fact that the government has seemingly been systematically eliminating the church's ability to so much as say that we find homosexuality to be a sin. It's another step in a long series of things that appear to be a targeted effort to minimize the church's influence and discredit our beliefs.

Homosexuality has essentially become the poster child for a movement in which the church gets labelled as outdated, intolerant, and offensive. And, really, that's where my disagreement with the movement stems from. In my eyes, homosexuality is wrong. But, I don't hate homosexuals by any stretch of the imagination. Some of the best, deepest conversations I have ever had in my life, I have had with homosexuals. I find it incredibly offensive that I'm routinely painted as ignorant or an idiot for daring to believe in my right to say that I disagree with someone else's lifestyle. Just because I think something is a sin, it doesn't mean that I hate anybody who does it. If I hated everyone who viewed pornography, I'd probably have to live under a rock somewhere.

But I do eminently reserve the right to view homosexuality as a sin, just like I reserve the right to view pornography or murder or theft as a sin. If you're gay, well, I can't say I agree with your lifestyle, but I'm not going to scream at you for it. I'm not perfect, and it's not my right to judge. But when someone starts telling me that I'm not allowed to believe something, or to share my personal viewpoint, I absolutely will get out there and raise a fuss about it.

As I see it, the government is a amoral institution, and it has no business telling anybody what their moral views ought to be. Homosexuals deserve the right to view their lifestyle as acceptable, and Christians deserve the right to view it as unacceptable; neither side should be allowed to actively persecute the other. Yes, some Christians have abused this right, but that's because they've made the mistake of forgetting Christ's mandate to love people, even if they are sinners in our eyes, but we deserve a right to free speech nonetheless.

*gets off soapbox*

I don't really see how gay marriage affects the church's "rights" tbh. If gay marriage were legalized, that doesn't mean you can't still view it as a sin, it just means that those that don't subscribe to Christianity don't have to abide by it. Why should gays be disallowed from marrying just because of the beliefs of a major religion?

I think this depends on whether you are viewing marriage as a religious or legal institution.

Rob @ 5/8/2012 22:50

What we disagree with is the fact that the government has seemingly been systematically eliminating the church's ability to so much as say that we find homosexuality to be a sin. It's another step in a long series of things that appear to be a targeted effort to minimize the church's influence and discredit our beliefs.

Quote

As I see it, the government is a amoral institution, and it has no business telling anybody what their moral views ought to be.

I feel like these two statements kind of contradict one another. The separation of church and state isn't a new idea, it's been with us for years. Marriage isn't an exclusively Christian institution, and I think what the homosexual community is more interested in is the legal/governmental recognition of their relationship as a long term commitment. If the issue were keeping marriage as exclusively religious then athiests would also not be allowed to marry. Filing taxes, establishing a will, health coverage, etc. are all legal areas where I believe people should be allowed equal treatment and recognition by the government. I don't think those in any way effect Christians or their personal and religious beliefs on someone elses lifestyle.

Being gay and murdering someone are two totally different things. I know you are not saying that they are similar but it makes it sound like you are making it by saying they are sinful. So it's wrong but you don' hate them? You make it sound like you are so better than us homosexuals. What are we your fucking dogs? "Oh no you two dudes are fucking again? That's wrong! Bad gays! Bad gays bad!" I didn't choose to be gay and I'm pretty sure everyone else that is gay didn't. So when it's said that we are wrong for what we we're just born to be, it's infuriating.

Natalie @ 6/8/2012 4:02

Rob @ 5/8/2012 22:50 What we disagree with is the fact that the government has seemingly been systematically eliminating the church's ability to so much as say that we find homosexuality to be a sin. It's another step in a long series of things that appear to be a targeted effort to minimize the church's influence and discredit our beliefs. Quote As I see it, the government is a amoral institution, and it has no business telling anybody what their moral views ought to be. I feel like these two statements kind of contradict one another. The separation of church and state isn't a new idea, it's been with us for years. Marriage isn't an exclusively Christian institution, and I think what the homosexual community is more interested in is the legal/governmental recognition of their relationship as a long term commitment. If the issue were keeping marriage as exclusively religious then athiests would also not be allowed to marry. Filing taxes, establishing a will, health coverage, etc. are all legal areas where I believe people should be allowed equal treatment and recognition by the government. I don't think those in any way effect Christians or their personal and religious beliefs on someone elses lifestyle.

This reply also addresses Boc's post. I'm not really objecting to gay marriage at all. It's the government's call, and I long ago stopped believing that the government had any interest in morality. And, yes, the fact that gay people are allowed to get married has little effect on the church. What I think the majority of Christians (myself not included) are worried about is the fact that allowing homosexual marriage may theoretically lead to a full-scale devaluation of the church. I don't necessarily agree, because I think that disallowing homosexual marriage isn't going to cause homosexuals to throw their hands up in despair and become straight. As I said, I think the debate isn't about the homosexual marriage issue at all, it's about what the church things that it might lead to.

What I personally object to is the fact that there are currently legislation debates going on in my home province that are considering making it illegal for me to tell my own children in my own home that I consider homosexuality a sin. That's a huge violation of my right to free speech, and I believe that there is a significant difference between allowing homosexuals the same rights as everyone else and forcing me to profess a specific moral perspective. Does that mean that I expect the government to adopt an anti-gay bias? No. That would be persecution towards them, and if I don't want it done to me, I certainly don't want it done to them.

Cake the Cat @ 6/8/2012 4:37

Being gay and murdering someone are two totally different things. I know you are not saying that they are similar but it makes it sound like you are making it by saying they are sinful.

Let me get this straight. You're mad about me saying something you admit that I'm not actually saying? I had murder on the brain, so that's the example I used. I'm sorry if that offended you. If I change "murder" to "taking the Lord's name in vain," that might make it better.

Quote

So it's wrong but you don' hate them? You make it sound like you are so better than us homosexuals.

I think that all sins are wrong. I'm a sinner myself, and I don't really think I'm better than anybody. Sorry if that's how it sounded.

Quote

What are we your fucking dogs? "Oh no you two dudes are fucking again? That's wrong! Bad gays! Bad gays bad!"

What? I'm saying I respect homosexuals as people, and I respect their right to make their own choices even if I happen to disagree with them. I don't logically follow how you interpret that as disrespect.

Quote

I didn't choose to be gay and I'm pretty sure everyone else that is gay didn't. So when it's said that we are wrong for what we we're just born to be, it's infuriating.

Did I say that you chose that? As a matter of fact, I did not. I would never say that. I'm well aware that it's entirely possible to be born with homosexual tendencies. I'm also aware that it's possible to be born with any number of sexual preferences which differ from quote-unquote "regular" sex. And let me state for the record, this is not a case of me passing judgment in an area in which I am inexperienced. I spent several years researching the psychology behind sexual development, because my own preferences are not normal. I was born the way that I am, without choosing it, and I've had some pretty serious difficulties dealing with that, because my own particular attractions aren't something society thinks is great.

I do, however, feel that, at least in my own personal case, "being what you're born to be" is a weak standpoint. As another example, if I happen to be a person who was born having attachment issues (which, yes, can stem from birth), I still fully expect that people will look down on me for cheating on my significant other, even though I have a legitimate biological and psychological compulsion to do so. Just because I have a pre-existing inclination, or even compulsion, to do something wrong, I don't think that that makes me blameless in doing that thing. I do think it seriously sucks to be dealt that kind of hand in life, and that it leads to a lot of pain and misery (and has led to that, for me), but I don't think it's impossible to overcome. I do fully expect that if I were to do the things I am sexually programmed to do, it would be wrong, and I accept that and don't take it personally. And it might just be that I'm a very different person from you.

Basically, Paul and Natalie have nailed my point. I would boycott Chick-fil-A, but I went there so rarely to begin with (I think I've been there, like, twice, and once it was because I had a coupon), that to boycott them would be a completely hollow, empty gesture. THAT'LL SHOW 'EM!

some dude apparently shot a couple of people, somewhre in america. today, or yesterday. is it related to this? i only heard "man killing.. xy people"..in..boston? maybe? is this related to chick-a-fil? was he mad cause of the fags? or because everyone was talking bout chick-a-fils and he couldnt stand it anymore?

Nah that was in Wisconsin. Only like 30 minutes away from where I live actually

It had nothing to do with this though. It was a white supremacist who shot up a Sikh temple