Thoughts on Gay Relationship and/or Gay Marriages.
68
This hub was written as a reply to the The Truth About Same-Sex Marriage, Equal Rights. As I recalled there also was a request on this subject I sort of decided to bring the two together.
As it appears there is a coalition in the Defense of Marriage in the US. Which got me wondering... Would that be the same kind of coalition as the one Bush and Blair formed to protect us from the Weapons of Mass Destruction that were held by Iraq? Should California be prepared for swift attacking units that aim their smart bombs at the core of the gay community in the Bay area? Will faith-based organizations drop their daisycutters on homosexual couples?
It doesn't seem to be this violent at this stage, fortunately. Until now all the members of the coalition do is "proclaim that which is truth".
Knowing they'd be acting against the law if they stated otherwise, "the Church does not object to rights (already established in California) regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights, so long as these do not infringe on the integrity of the family or the constitutional rights of churches and their adherents to administer and practice their religion free from government interference."
Mind you, they don't object. Which is slightly different than acknowledge.
Sexual morality
"The Church has a single, undeviating standard of sexual morality: intimate relations are proper only between a husband and a wife united in the bonds of matrimony." (DIM).
This church indeed has a standard of sexual morality which is however not really undeviating. You see, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has a history of polygamy, which was officially abandoned in 1890, simply because president Woodruff so decreed.
One may also question this "standard of sexual morality" as there are quite some reports that associate LDS members to child abuse. The name Jeremiah Scott may ring a bell. In addition the LDS has for long had no problem whatsoever with underage girls being married. "An elder in a Texas polygamist group says church policy going forward will to be to forbid any girl to marry who is not old enough to legally consent in the state where she lives. Willie Jessop of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints said Monday the church has been widely misunderstood. But he says the church will not sanction marriages of underage girls and will counsel members against such unions.
Jessop, a church leader, insists marriages within the church have always been consensual." (source: Associated Press | Jun 2, 08).
Churches and Marriage
A Church most often is a community in its own. And thus a church can set out rules and guidelines within that community. There's no problem with that. The churches 'jurisdiction' ends however, where society begins. If a church wants to limit the ecclesiastical marriage to man and woman only, society has to accept and respect that. Church should have no say in the rules regarding the civil marriage though.
LdsNana-AskMormon says:
"Marriage between those who practice homosexuality, also known as same-sex marriage, distorts truth... and the truth is that wickedness never was happiness."
How can two people sharing love be wicked? In what way can love equal wickedness? It may not be your personal choice, you may even disapprove of it, but love shared between two people can't be wicked.
"Every child born is entitled to both a mother and a father. It is their birth "right".
As marriages between people of the opposite sex are legal a child born from such a relationship will have both a mother and a father. In fact, since we still don't clone people it's a biological law that a child will have both a father and a mother.
"Consider the child, perhaps one of your own future children or grandchildren, who would be brought up in a world where not only are same-sex marriages legalized, but the homosexual relationship is taught and accepted in your community as normal, and equally as acceptable as, a heterosexual relationship?"
Consider the child that learns that love is something beautiful that can be shared between people. How bad would that be?
Gay relationships
Ok, let's leave the LDS for what it is. The request is about gay relationships and/or marriages. We can of course close our eyes for the truth if we prefer to. But the fact remains that homosexuality exists. It is a simple reality. It may be a mistake made by nature or god, it may be a conscious decision (although research shows that homosexuality among animals is more common than we thought), there may be numerous causes for it, but the fact remains that it exists.
Now what's the problem with that? I am straight. Does it harm me if two people from the same sex love each other? Does it harm me if they live together? Does it harm me if they confirm their relationship? Do I need to change my beliefs just because they are who they are? I don't think so.
Should the gay marriage be legalized? No. As far as I'm concerned it shouldn't. As far as I'm concerned marriage should be open to consenting adults. Regardless of their sex, race, religion or number. The government should not make any distinction at all. If you're an adult, by all means marry who you want to marry (as long as your spouse is an adult as well, of course). And may your relationship be merry and gay, whether you're hetero-, homo- or bisexual.
What's your opinion?
Relationships between homosexuals are
See results without voting
|
NEW Wedding Crashers (Blu-ray)
Current Bid: $9.79
|
|
3 Ct Pave Eternity Ring Diamond Wedding Band White GOLD
Current Bid: $3475.00
|
|
2.7 ct PRINCESS DIAMOND WEDDING ENGAGEMENT RING SET
Current Bid: $5600.00
|
| No Photo |
Tuxedo Tux t-shirt prom wedding Bachelor Party BLACK
Current Bid: $9.95
|
|
A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality
Price: $3.95
List Price: $17.00 |
|
What the Bible Really Says About Homosexuality
Price: $7.37
List Price: $14.00 |
|
Can Homosexuality Be Healed?
Price: $10.42
List Price: $14.00 |
|
101 Frequently Asked Questions About Homosexuality
Price: $7.36
List Price: $12.99 |
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
Exactly my point, CJ. I never understood how OTHER peoples' choices could endanger my way of living. Live and let live, I would say. Thanks for commenting!
What really, really frosts me is how twisted many, many Christian religious sects are on the topic of sexuality, and yet, at the same time, those same sects feel confident dictating right and wrong in matters sexual. The real problem is that the U.S. is currently being hijacked by a virulent strain of Christianity that is oppressive, judgemental, and vicious. I am starting to see it as no different really than Nazism in Germany--it's largely made up of white people who feel as if they are special in some way and it always leans toward nationalism. I can't even begin to fully express how disgusted, angry, and worried I am about this trend. We are on the verge of facism here. So much hinges on this next election--not that I think either candidate can save the day, but if the Christian nutball party gets in, we're toast--gays, democrats, anyone with two functioning brain cells will be in big trouble here. Great hub, thank you Ananta.
The intolerance is what worries me too, Pam. Not just in the US and not just with Christians, but in general :(
Thank you for reading and commenting.
Some of the nicest people I know are gays - some are close friends - why on earth can't they be happy any way they want to? Would that more people started focussing on their own relationships and less on others'!
I agree, I have a number of gay friends, and I have no problem at all with their choices or needs. It is nobodies business but theirs so long as they are happy,
I totally agree, Shalini Kagal and Mistyhorizon. But that was already clear, I guess :)Thanks for reading and commenting
Ananta65 -
Perhaps I should be flattered that my Hub has incited you so? But, I am not. In fact, I am saddened deeply that you have not simply responded with your opinion in a respectful way; but that you have gone on an attack of not only my Church, but that in your article you have ignored many legitimate concerns that I discuss about the issue of same-sex marriage and the family; in a kind way.
I made it very clear in my Hub, that a position to defend the Divine Institution of Marriage, is in no way an attack on the homosexual community. I also stated that I personally have very close experience, and not with just a "friend" who has struggled with same-gender attraction. I am not a stranger to this plight in any way.
The Divine institution of Marriage is meant to accomplish much more than a legal binding of two individuals who love each other. If it were only that, we would not need to have this conversation. Nor is the conversation about those who don't like each other. It is not hate-based. That is a lie, intented to divert the very reasonable reasons why traditional marriage should be upheld.
An individuals gender preference is none of my business. The actions that they desire to pursue, if they threaten to change that which I value deeply - does. It is my right as a citizen of the U.S. to speak out on such an issue, be it political or moral.
It is my personal desire to speak up, with respect and sensitivity to those whose position I oppose. It is not my position to use a tactic where I attack a person/people and not the issue - with the intent to divert the true reasons for the debate.
I am not here to convince, distort or to debate. I am here only to educate in as respectful of a manner as I am humanly capable.
tDMg
LdsNana-AskMormon
This is a very mixed up post. Maybe combining the two subjects wasn't the best idea. You leap from the conflict currently occuring over gay marriage to Warren Jeffs and then to the children raised in same-sex marriage households.
If its meant to be an attack, an opinion, or something coherent- this page is not that.
Ananta,
Respectfully I must request that as a member of the LDS Church, you as well, gather your facts more carefully. Warren Jeffs is not a member of the LDS Church. You have done a wonderful job of attacking a church when the issue is simply based on a proposition to redefine marriage with Proposition 8 in California. Perhaps, as I see you are living in the Netherlands, you are unfamiliar with the actual issue.
It is really interesting to me how redefinition of marriage would actually open the door to the legalization of polygamy, so I find it interesting you have made this comparison.
You might find these statistical links interesting, considering you are from the Netherlands.
Check http://tinyurl.com/5hcpqc and http://tinyurl.com/3xpkz
Ananta65,
Whether I agree or disagree with your opinions regarding gay relationships or marriage I do find fault with your discussion of the LDS church. Warren Jeffs is a member of the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. LDSNana and myself are members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. The churches are very different, and using the FLDS church to attack the LDS church does not help your point, but spreads ignorance.
Fact: The LDS Church does not support polygamy. President Woodruff, who we consider a Prophet of God, received divine revelation to discontinue polygamy. I will attribute your assumption that President Woodruff's decision was made on a whim as lack of knowledge on your part.
Fact: The LDS Church does not support underage marriage, statutory rape or child abuse. The FLDS church did, as you point out, support underage nonconsenual marriage, and child abuse. Misattributing the position to the LDS church was hopefully a mistake on your part, and not malicious.
I have gay friends, I have friends who have same sex attraction. I have a family member that suffers from same sex attraction, I support them one and all. I love them because they are God's children. However, I do not believe that if they act on their desires I should have to accept them.
I believe that homosexual relations are a sin while you do not. I respect your decision, but will make an effort on my part to promote that marriage be between and man and a woman. You will do the opposite, luckily we live in a country where we can promote our beliefs and ideals with freedom. In this case California now allows gay marriage, I support the right of individuals to marry because it is the law, but will also support anyone attempting to overturn the lawas I believe that is what is right.
13x13
I would say speaking from all truthfullnes, God's two most hated sins are murder and sexual immorality. So the opposite effect is true that he souly exists for life, and he revels in the chastity of men and women. It is litterally his purpose of being to have children who are morally clean.
It was he who invented the word marriage, that institution was given to man through him who's right it was to do so, and for men to alter the meaning of that sacred promise is abominable in the eyes of God.
Wow James! Murder and sexual immorality in the same breath and on the same footing, as if they were equal sins in the sight of God. That's a very weird view of God you have there. I'm glad I'm not you.
How sad that so many people set themselves up in moral judgement of homosexuals. Homosexuality is not just another lifestyle choice, it is something that runs much deeper. There are many 'sins' of a sexual nature that are rightly abhorred in modern society, but homosexuality between consenting adults should never be included on this list.
Dear LdsNana-AskMormon,How you feel is your business. You don't have to feel flattered, as far as I'm concerned. Truth is that a lot came to my mind as I was reading your hub. You and your Church have strong views on marriage. I have strong views on people and institutions with strong views on how other people should live their lives. And the LDS certainly has strong views on what is right and what is wrong when it comes to relationships. "Judge not, that ye be not judged." (Matthew 7:1).Besides, I'm not attacking. I'm merely referring to the the facts, such as the conviction of your member Warren Jeffs. Please don't blame me for the fact that a judge has found him guilty of child abuse. Nor can you blame me for the fact that the LDS states at their website that they officially ceased the practice of such marriages after the Manifesto was issued by President Woodruff in 1890.I have indeed ignored your concerns, simply because they're your concerns and not mine. Your position to defend the Divine Insititution of Marriage is an attempt to exclude anyone (homosexuals in particular) from that institution in my view.And as it is your right to speak out on this issue, it's also my right to disagree. For nor am I am here to convince, distort or to debate. I am here only to educate in as respectful of a manner as I am humanly capable.Best regards,Ananta65
I know you've got a point, Trojan. Reading the mentioned hub simply triggered several different thought and these thought have been expressed in this hub.
In The Doghouse: I have gathered my information from the internet and consulted a number of journalistic sources, such as the New York Times. As for those links, well... For me marriage is not a sacred institution. It's as simple as that. But it's a legal institution that exists, as well as a religious institution. I'm not critisizing the latter, but the legal institution should be open for anyone. The first law of our constitution states that any person, regardless of race, color, ethnicity, gender or what ever characteristic must be treated the same under the same circumstances.
13x13: If apparently there are two Churches of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, I apologize for any erroneous assumption or statement in the hub. I wish you all the best in your efforts to promote marriage as a man/woman only thing.
May your god be with you James and keep you from wrong.
Amanda, I would even go as far as saying that there are no sins of sexual nature. In my view something can not be sinful as long as there is mutual consent among mature (adult) people. The sins you may refer to, such as abuse, are sins of violence in my opinion.
Gosh, what a can of worms you have opened here Ananta65.
Do you ever wonder whether or not the posts by people who don't agree with you may be the same person posting under different guises, especially when they are not registered users of hub pages. This might give more credence to their argument if they give the impression of being multiple people with the same opinion?
Still believe it is none of our business if two gay people love each other and want to get married. Good luck to them, no-one has the right to judge them based on a dusty book!
It's such a silly argument in my opinion...
Religious marriage...dictate whatever terms you want, Under freedom of religion you indeed have the right to live by whatever covenant you choose, worship any god you want, whatever makes YOU happy and your god too I guess.
BUT...should I choose to have a civil wedding (and ohhhh how that word means more than just non-religious at times doesn't it?) which is legal and binding under governmental law, then what business is it of any church doctrine to stick its nose into MY business.
This is why church and state should ALWAYS be kept separate. So that those of us that would like to continue to enjoy the freedoms guaranteed by our forefathers would not have to suffer the persecution of those that would assume a holier-than-thou attitude and force their religions down our throats.
I personally think that it's wonderful that two people of whatever gender are willing to make that commitment to eachother...to love, honor and cherish, til death do they part.
I knew it’s a controversial subject, Mistyhorizon :)And no, I don’t wonder although it is quite possible. Whether or not these people are the same doesn’t really matter to me. If people feel they should ventilate and substantiate their opinions that way, let them be. Thank you for reading and commenting, I agree with your view.
Before reading the comments I had just modified the hub, Spryte. I had the same thought. Feel free to govern weddings in the church, but stay out of the civil marriage. I advocate the separation of church and state too. Thank you for the comment.
wow this was quite a hub....seems to me if rules/laws were followed and people obeyed the simple 10 commandments..we wouldn't even have this discussion...." do unto other's as you would have them do unto you..." Life would be easier and as one loves the other wouldn't matter....we all would be loved..as we chose...Thanks Be to God .... G-Ma :o) Hugs
do unto others as you would have them do unto you, lieve and lert live. I completely agree, G-Ma. Thank you for stopping by *hugs*
...if only that had been one of the ten commandments, the world might just have been a better place to live in wouldn't you say? :)
I most certainly would, Shalini Kagal! :)
Thanks for reading and commenting
well that is just one of my favorite sayings Shalini....but should one truly follow the 10 commandments..then we would more then likely all feel that way....G-Ma :o) hugs
I have been preaching for some time now that the religious group you belong to ought to determine your practice and ability to marry. IF you want to be openly gay and get married, the government has NO say on the matter. It's not up to mormons or Christians to manage the protection of marriage. It's hilarious how long the issue has been around but only recently has there been civil actions against this very small minority.
Vote Talented_Ink/t.keeley in '08 and you can be promised that all people will enjoy their right to pursue life, liberty, and happiness!
I am not gay, nor do I belong to a religious group, t.keeley. But reading your comment, I assume that you weren't addressing me. If I were a US citizen I'd surely consider voting the Talented Tandem :)
Thanks for commenting and fel free to campaign ;)
It was an open address :) Sorry for any confusion.
What I was saying is that if someone wants to be in a gay-free religious sect, fine. Don't harass those who aren't :) It goes both ways, but I still stand by the fact that whatever happens, religious groups handle moral dilemma, NOT the feds! :D
No problem, t.Keeley.
I don't think that moral dilemmas are the exclusive territory of religious groups, though. That would imply that people like myself - not associated with any religious movement - have no say in moral issues? Or can I just simply assume that any moral valuation does not apply to me?
I dislike the phrase, "Fell in love" it implies that a person didn't have a choice in the matter, as though freewill was taken out of the equation. But love is a commandment, it is a kindness, and the willingness to coexist with others.
I've never associated the feeling of love (or any other emotion for that matter) with free will. How you DEAL with them, that's free will, but the existence? Don't think so.
Gotta side with Ananta on love being so closely tied with free will. I can be kind and co-exist with others and still dislike them...that's called civility and society. But to fall in love with somebody...you definitely don't need a reason and it certainly isn't a conscious decision.
Just like I don't believe that it's a decision out of free will to be or not be gay. Just because we've got free will does not mean that we've gotten rid of instincts, emotions and genetic characteristics.
If it were a matter of free will...I know a lot of gay friends that would have chosen to will it away :) It was a long road for them to travel to accept who they were.
Exactly, free will cannot change who you are. :)
I believe that it is a human trait , that we are all designed to have complete control over our bodies and our minds. Love, in most cases, is a consious decesion to make. But people rely on their eyes and their carnal desires which bypasses all personality traits and places wants over needs.
Let's agree to disagree, James. Simple thing is that we don't. You and I have no control over our body. Try holding your breath for 24 hours. If you succeed, you've proven your point. But my bet is that your body will eventually take control and force you to breathe. Our control is limited.
The point that I am stressing to you is simply that all persons are entitled to their agency, for God has so ordainde it. He has constituted mankind moral agents, and given them power to choose good or evil; to seek after that which is good, by pursuing the pathway of holiness in this life, which brings piece of mind, and joy in the holy ghost heer, and a fulness of joy and happiness at his right hand in the hearafter; or to pursue an evil course, going on in sin and rebelion against God, thereby bringing condemnation to their souls in this world, and eternal loss in the world to come.
May your god be with you, James
Great hub and great comments. I can't help but notice that, at least on HubPages, the Mormons are all against same-sex marriage rights, and *everyone else* is for them. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.
Thank you livelonger. We can't all agree. Different folks, different strokes. Here in the Netherlands there aren't so many mormons, but religious people from other denominations are strongly against same sex marriage. I still can't see how the personal choices of others can affect your life.
They don't. It's a case of people intruding on other people's rights, usually because they think they will be rewarded for their bigotry in the afterlife.
I guess so, livelonger, I guess so... Live and let live is the motto I prefer
Well, you said it all in your article, and all the comments were a plus!
spryte said if quite succinctly and precisely: If being gay could be willed away, chances are many gay people would have willed it away, considering the shitty time they got from every frigging one when they first understood that they were gay.
What I don't get is why some almighty people get so bothered with this. If a gay person tried to get in their pants, then all right-y, but otherwise, what's their problem?!
Oh well --off my soap box now :-) Great read!
There's little I can add to that. Great comment, Elena! :)
love could be with anyone; but there is a big difference between love and sickness, love make you better person, no sick or having unhealthy relationship; same sex marriage is just sickness and shouldn't be in puplic or legalize it as usual marriage.
Say "No for same sex", not for your wellness only but as community and our kids to keep our society safe and healthy generation after generation; read more: http://hubpages.com/hub/No-same-sex-marriage
i am with human rights that keep us safe as community
You are entitled to your own opinion, mohamedhmm. Personally I haven't come across any same sex relationship that harmed anyone; physically, nor mentally. So your diagnosis is quite surprising, to say the least.
Same-sex Marriage is a wide and a complex issue. It is not just about religion or politics... This issue is, so far, not being properly dealt with. It's just creating nuisance rather than enlightenment.
Anata, Good Hub, of course I don't agree no one gets hurt. Why do the proponents insist on calling it marriage when they know that causes problems for those of us who are religious? What is wrong with civil union and let it go? Its appears that the proponents won't settle for anything but slapping Christians right in the face. You may get what you want but there will always be hurt and it will never go away, is that what you're after?
Pgrundy you have serious issues, its time to back off the hormones! What the hell is wrong with you? You blow everything out of proportion and immediately assume some kind of evil is attached. Your Lefty-Loo attitude is like a flower child gone berserk! Get some help you're losing it!Peace.
I the term 'marriage' was used only in church, I'd gladly agree with you sneakorocksolid. However, marriage has a civil meaning and definition.
Ananta65, I don't have a problem with gays having whatever makes they're day. I just want the world to know that what they do is nothing like the 33 years we've had. I don't think its ok to assume we would like to be stirred into the same mix. There should be a line that clearly states there's marriage and then there's the pacifier we gave gay couples and they have two completely different meanings. One is a sacred ceremony and the other is a secular ceremony.Peace.
Since you have read my hub, you won't be surprised that I beg to differ :) To me nothing's sacred.
However, I don't think we'll ever get to an agreement on this subject and until now you seem to be representing the majority's opinion. So be it. Peace.
Ananta65, Your Hub is great you got it all going! People and their opinions are the spice of life! I may seem insensitive but I still cry at the movies. I'm for gay rights just not at the expense of ours. I believe there is a compromise out there but were not past the pie fight yet. Peace.
I guess this pie fight won't be over until we stop thinking in terms of 'their' and 'our' rights.
Great Hub! =)
Thank you very much *smile*
CJStone says:
15 months ago
I agree. Love should be the only criterion for marriage, whether straight or gay. It always puzzles me when people get so defensive about this. What other people get up to in the privacy of their own bed (as long as it's consensual) is their business surely.