A Christian Argument for Gay Marriage

[Brochacholomigo]

So, I know I'm a few years too late for this thread to be timely, but I've devised a (hypothetically) foolproof argument from the Christian perspective in support of gay marriage. Presuming that less sin is better than more sin, gay marriage is the most crucial form of harm reduction available to homosexuals - surely, sucking dick outside of wedlock is worse than sucking dick inside of it. Not only that, but marriage kills sex drive, thus decreasing the net amount of gay sex in the world, reducing aggregate sin in addition to lessening the severity of individual incidents. It is for this reason that I think all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage are working to make the world a more sinful place, and are in need of a serious "come to Jesus" moment.

 

[Crovax]

Presuming that less sin is better than more sin

There's your problem

 

[Daisy]

all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage

And there's your 2nd problem...assuming all Christians lobby...I ain't lobbying for nothin'...I ain't doin' it...

 

[Brochacholomigo]

And there's your 2nd problem...assuming all Christians lobby...I ain't lobbying for nothin'...I ain't doin' it...

The phrase can't be taken piecemeal, Elora. "All Christian who lobby" is the group in question, rather than "all Christians." That said, under my proposed moral framework (which is entirely based within the logic of measured punishment espoused in both the old and new Testaments), I do consider it a moral imperative for Christians to expand access to gay marriage across the globe. Perhaps "all Christians" was actually the correct phrasing to use, after all.

There's your problem

I see no problem with my reasoning. In the Old Testament, Moses is instructed to prescribe different degrees of punishment to different sins, clearly indicating that sin can be greater or worse than other sin, and that it is desirable and good in the eyes of God to treat sin as such. In the New Testament, Jesus himself reinforces this idea of equivalent punishment when he states "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." If that isn't a clear indicator of punishment proportional to the infraction, I don't know what is. From this, it's only logical to conclude that lessening existing sins is just as moral and imperative for Christians as punishing sins. Hence, sucking dick in wedlock is preferable to sucking dick out of wedlock.

 

[LittleNipper]

The phrase can't be taken piecemeal, Elora. "All Christian who lobby" is the group in question, rather than "all Christians." That said, under my proposed moral framework (which is entirely based within the logic of measured punishment espoused in both the old and new Testaments), I do consider it a moral imperative for Christians to expand access to gay marriage across the globe. Perhaps "all Christians" was actually the correct phrasing to use, after all.


I see no problem with my reasoning. In the Old Testament, Moses is instructed to prescribe different degrees of punishment to different sins, clearly indicating that sin can be greater or worse than other sin, and that it is desirable and good in the eyes of God to treat sin as such. In the New Testament, Jesus himself reinforces this idea of equivalent punishment when he states "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth." If that isn't a clear indicator of punishment proportional to the infraction, I don't know what is. From this, it's only logical to conclude that lessening existing sins is just as moral and imperative for Christians as punishing sins. Hence, sucking dick in wedlock is preferable to sucking dick out of wedlock.

The wages of sin is death but the gift of GOD is eternal life through JESUS CHRIST our LORD.

 

[Maccabee]

So, I know I'm a few years too late for this thread to be timely, but I've devised a (hypothetically) foolproof argument from the Christian perspective in support of gay marriage. Presuming that less sin is better than more sin, gay marriage is the most crucial form of harm reduction available to homosexuals - surely, sucking dick outside of wedlock is worse than sucking dick inside of it. Not only that, but marriage kills sex drive, thus decreasing the net amount of gay sex in the world, reducing aggregate sin in addition to lessening the severity of individual incidents. It is for this reason that I think all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage are working to make the world a more sinful place, and are in need of a serious "come to Jesus" moment.

An interesting take. At this point I'd probably accept any argument for gay marriage.

 

[Maccabee]

The wages of sin is death but the gift of GOD is eternal life through JESUS CHRIST our LORD.

So you never lied as a Christian?

 

[lemmiwinx]

What is marriage anyway? The only reason to even discuss it are the legal consequences. Let the damn lawyers fight it out that's their job. Other than that I don't care if you marry a cute little fire hydrant on corner that's you decision.

 

[LittleNipper]

So you never lied as a Christian?

I would say that I have ----- I'm still forgiven, and I will not be perfect until the day I die and go to be with the LORD. However, I don't make a habit of it. An example would be when I'm aske if I like someone's cake that they backed. I might say, it wasn't bad ---- but the truth is ----- it might not have been good either.

 

[LittleNipper]

What is marriage anyway? The only reason to even discuss it are the legal consequences. Let the damn lawyers fight it out that's their job. Other than that I don't care if you marry a cute little fire hydrant on corner that's you decision.

The problem is how it may affect impressionable teens---- and younger. And in more than one way. Some may suggest, that they are not AS BAD having heterosexual sex outside of marriage ------ as "they" are.

 

[Gordy327]

Who cares if gays marry? Whether a couple marry or not is their decision and no one else's business. Ssme sex marriage is here, it's legal, it's been around forever in various cultures. So why would anyone care?

 

[ALiberalModerate]

So, I know I'm a few years too late for this thread to be timely, but I've devised a (hypothetically) foolproof argument from the Christian perspective in support of gay marriage. Presuming that less sin is better than more sin, gay marriage is the most crucial form of harm reduction available to homosexuals - surely, sucking dick outside of wedlock is worse than sucking dick inside of it. Not only that, but marriage kills sex drive, thus decreasing the net amount of gay sex in the world, reducing aggregate sin in addition to lessening the severity of individual incidents. It is for this reason that I think all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage are working to make the world a more sinful place, and are in need of a serious "come to Jesus" moment.

The Biblical concept of marriage is not how we conceive it today. From a Biblical perspective, women are property of their family until their husband's family pays a bride price and they are married to their husband. From then on, that woman is the property of her husband and husband's family. This is why rape is considered a property crime in the Bible. For example, Biblically, if a man were to rape a woman before she was married, he is to pay restitution to her family as she is now worthless to them having been raped. If she doesn't cry out while being raped, then she is to be stoned to death as that would mean she was obviously complicit (Never mind, her rapist could have held a knife to her throat). If she is impregnated by her rapist, then her rapist is to pay a bride price to the family and marry her.

My point in all of this is that there is no way you could have a Biblical gay marriage because such an arrangement was utterly inconceivable to the Bronze Age desert wanderers that originally wrote the Bible. See that's the thing, you have to put this in its Bronze Age historical perspective. The people that wrote the Bible would make the Taliban look Woke. Granted, 2000 years of Christianity has slowly sanitized and reformed the original beliefs, but you can count on them using those original beliefs anytime they want to pull the religion card with a group they don't like, like the gays.

 

[Gordy327]

The Biblical concept of marriage is not how we conceive it today. From a Biblical perspective, women are property of their family until their husband's family pays a bride price and they are married to their husband. From then on, that woman is the property of her husband and husband's family. This is why rape is considered a property crime in the Bible. For example, Biblically, if a man were to rape a woman before she was married, he is to pay restitution to her family as she is now worthless to them having been raped. If she doesn't cry out while being raped, then she is to be stoned to death as that would mean she was obviously complicit (Never mind, her rapist could have held a knife to her throat). If she is impregnated by her rapist, then her rapist is to pay a bride price to the family and marry her.

My point in all of this is that there is no way you could have a Biblical gay marriage because such an arrangement was utterly inconceivable to the Bronze Age desert wanderers that originally wrote the Bible. See that's the thing, you have to put this in its Bronze Age historical perspective. The people that wrote the Bible would make the Taliban look Woke. Granted, 2000 years of Christianity has slowly sanitized and reformed the original beliefs, but you can count on them using those original beliefs anytime they want to pull the religion card with a group they don't like, like the gays.

Marriage today, especially in this country, is a secular legal contract between 2 consenting adults. Religion is neither necessary or required to be married. The religious aspect is merely ceremonial. Not all religious denominations take issue with same sex marriage either.

 

[LittleNipper]

Who cares if gays marry? Whether a couple marry or not is their decision and no one else's business. Same sex marriage is here, it's legal, it's been around forever in various cultures. So why would anyone care?

Why not investigate how well such "cultures" fared. Smoking cigarettes is not illegal and yet I would not encourage anyone to partake, and I would try to encourage the individual to stop for his health's sake. I personally don't wish homosexual behavior normalized. I believe they would make questionable as teachers as they would influence their students. I don't like them making programs that could have a slant one way or another.

 

[Gordy327]

Why not investigate how well such "cultures" fared. Smoking cigarettes is not illegal and yet I would not encourage anyone to partake, and I would try to encourage the individual to stop for his health's sake. I personally don't wish homosexual behavior normalized. I believe they would make questionable as teachers as they would influence their students. I don't like them making programs that could have a slant one way or another.

What an ignorant and bigoted statement against gays. But then, religion is good at influencing people like that.

 

[LittleNipper]

What an ignorant and bigoted statement against gays. But then, religion is good at influencing people like that.

You've said far worse about Christians.

 

[LittleNipper]

Marriage today, especially in this country, is a secular legal contract between 2 consenting adults. Religion is neither necessary or required to be married. The religious aspect is merely ceremonial. Not all religious denominations take issue with same sex marriage either.

The godly ones do take issue. The social clubs do not.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Marriage today, especially in this country, is a secular legal contract between 2 consenting adults. Religion is neither necessary or required to be married. The religious aspect is merely ceremonial. Not all religious denominations take issue with same sex marriage either.

I agree. Religious marriage has nothing to do with legal marriage. My point is that the notion of a Christian/Biblical marriage in today's world is absurd anyway.

 

[Gordy327]

You've said far worse about Christians.

Not at all. I simply call them or anyone out when they spew hateful, ignorant comments like yours.

 

[Gordy327]

The godly ones do take issue. The social clubs do not.

That's that's their problem then. They don't have any sy or business in what others choose to do.

 

[Gordy327]

I agree. Religious marriage has nothing to do with legal marriage. My point is that the notion of a Christian/Biblical marriage in today's world is absurd anyway.

I tend to agree.

 

[Lursa]

I would say that I have ----- I'm still forgiven, and I will not be perfect until the day I die and go to be with the LORD. However, I don't make a habit of it. An example would be when I'm aske if I like someone's cake that they backed. I might say, it wasn't bad ---- but the truth is ----- it might not have been good either.

Only if you repent and you have lied in threads, in posts to me, and not repented. I've even asked you to!

 

[Lisa]

So, I know I'm a few years too late for this thread to be timely, but I've devised a (hypothetically) foolproof argument from the Christian perspective in support of gay marriage. Presuming that less sin is better than more sin, gay marriage is the most crucial form of harm reduction available to homosexuals - surely, sucking dick outside of wedlock is worse than sucking dick inside of it. Not only that, but marriage kills sex drive, thus decreasing the net amount of gay sex in the world, reducing aggregate sin in addition to lessening the severity of individual incidents. It is for this reason that I think all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage are working to make the world a more sinful place, and are in need of a serious "come to Jesus" moment.

The marriage of an LGBT couple does not in any way negatively affect a conservative Christian or their church because they are not excepted to like or support married LGBT people. Is it so difficult for conservative Christians to just ignore people and let them live their lives as they choose to do?

Your god created LGBT people, so just leave them alone.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

Your god

Hold up ol' buddy ol' pal o' mine, I never claimed to be a Christian. I just put myself in that headspace to make an interesting argument, and judging by some of the responses, it worked.

The wages of sin is death but the gift of GOD is eternal life through JESUS CHRIST our LORD.

Not seeing any arguments there, broski. Come back when you've got some proper theology to back your belief.

 

[Hamish Howl]

So, I know I'm a few years too late for this thread to be timely, but I've devised a (hypothetically) foolproof argument from the Christian perspective in support of gay marriage. Presuming that less sin is better than more sin, gay marriage is the most crucial form of harm reduction available to homosexuals - surely, sucking dick outside of wedlock is worse than sucking dick inside of it. Not only that, but marriage kills sex drive, thus decreasing the net amount of gay sex in the world, reducing aggregate sin in addition to lessening the severity of individual incidents. It is for this reason that I think all Christians who today lobby for the removal of institutional gay marriage are working to make the world a more sinful place, and are in need of a serious "come to Jesus" moment.

What? No it doesn't.