Opposition to Gay Marriage--is it necessarily hypocritical?

[_beastie]

ASbman -

You know as well as anyone else here that just because an LDS prophet claims to be speaking for God doesn't mean he is. This is a fact even if you are a believer - look at the explanations given on MAD for past prophetic "goofs".

You're trying to turn back the hands of time, to unlearn what you've learned that has caused you to be able to question in the first place.

It may work for a short while, but it is no long term solution. It's all in there, in your head. You can't just turn it off.

If you're serious about really trying to turn it all off, you're going to have to quit reading/discussing these things on the internet. You're going to have to seriously focus on training yourself to believe it all again, and that won't work as long as you keep learning information and discussing it in a thoughtful way with others. I don't mean to sound flip or sarcastic. I'm dead serious. My sister was once at the same point I was, in terms of studying church history and slowly realizing it may all be bunk. But the cost was too high for her. She told me to get out while my kids were young, but it was too late for her. She'd raised her kids as faithful LDS, her husband was a faithful believer, and she believed if she lost faith she'd lose her family. So she trained herself to believe. She stopped reading ANYTHING that could make her doubt and immersed herself in pro-mormon literature. She's still in the church today, over a decade later. I'm not saying it has brought her great happiness, but it has kept her in the church, which was what she decided HAD to happen.

[_GoodK]

I'll be honest. I don't know why God does not want us to legalize homosexual marriage, but I do know that He's against it.

Pretending for a moment that there is a "God", and you really had a good reason to believe in "Him", why is he so powerless over this situation? California has not fallen off the map, Governor Romney's state is doing just fine. Is he not at the helm?

Why does this "God" you claim to know so well need the help of his borderline insane followers in combatting the legalization of homosexual marriage?

If "He" is against something, doesn't he typically scourge his creations with plagues and other calamities? I know believers typically don't know their Bible's very well, but isn't that a well known trait of the Christian God?

I'm sorry to be a jerk, but I am so tired of people pretending to know things they don't know and telling others about it.

If someone came out and said, "I know that Mario is against homosexual marriage" he or she would be laughed at.

I think it is about time we start laughing at these religious idiots.

God feels that religious freedom is important even though I'm sure He'd be saddened if I joined another church.

More insanity. Seriously. Thoth would be saddened if I joined another church.

I think therefore that this issue is not simply about making all sin illegal. I think it does have to do with protecting the family although I'm not completely sure how.

So in the meantime... while you figure things out, you will continue to oppose the freedom of others because of a dumb, 2,000 year old fairy tale. Awesome.

[_asbestosman]

If you're serious about really trying to turn it all off, you're going to have to quit reading/discussing these things on the internet

Then why is it that Daniel Peterson maintains faith despite staying on the internet? I don't see why I can't do it. Well, I can see why I can't be him, but I don't see why I can't stay on the internet and become more faithful.

[_beastie]

Then why is it that Daniel Peterson maintains faith despite staying on the internet? I don't see why I can't do it. Well, I can see why I can't be him, but I don't see why I can't stay on the internet and become more faithful.

Well, there's no way I can say this without sounding insulting to DCP and other MADdites, but I can't help it. I want to answer your question. The difference between you and DCP and other MADdites is that you are too thoughtful in your consideration of the opposing argument. It's not a game to you. You're really listening and thinking. DCP and others are thinking and kind of listening, but it is pretty limited to figuring out "how to rebut". in my opinion. They're True Believers - they don't see the mountain to move. You're not a True Believer, and you see the mountain, and you're really trying to figure out how to move it. You can't.

[_Roger Morrison]

Maybe you/others can inform me of what i should, realisically, fear by allowing this small minority of people to live with the same marital rights that i enjoy. Their doing so in no way interferes with my rights to my status. Please, no Bible stuff.

It isn't necessarily about fear. As far as I know it is illegal to desicrate corpses, but what do we have to fear from permitting it? Corpses can't consent? What if the person signed documents granting the permission to his dead corpse?

I'm not sure how to relate "desicrating corpses" to allowing "marital rights" to Gays? I know you did intend that to address my "fear" question. Respectfully man, i don't think it did. But, if "it isn't necessarily about fear", then what, IYO is it about? And, is there justification in ANY opposing position, IYO?

[_Trevor]

Well, there's no way I can say this without sounding insulting to DCP and other MADdites, but I can't help it. I want to answer your question. The difference between you and DCP and other MADdites is that you are too thoughtful in your consideration of the opposing argument. It's not a game to you. You're really listening and thinking. DCP and others are thinking and kind of listening, but it is pretty limited to figuring out "how to rebut". in my opinion. They're True Believers - they don't see the mountain to move. You're not a True Believer, and you see the mountain, and you're really trying to figure out how to move it. You can't.

That's very insightful and very well put, beastie. Thanks.

[_cksalmon]

I think I'm largely with you, Ab.

I agree that folks should and should be able to vote their conscience.

I'd press your "hypocrite" question a bit further:

(1) Person A opposes gay marriage.
(2) Person A votes against gay marriage.
later...
(3) Person A adapts to and lives within a system that legally sanctions gay marriage.

I don't think the conjunction of (1-3) is in any way contradictory and thus is not hypocritical.

It's a very tough question and we Judeo-Christian theists have a lot of thinking and weighing to do.

I tend to waffle depending on which "side" I happen to be reading at the time.

Chris

[_Roger Morrison]

I think I'm largely with you, Ab.

I agree that folks should and should be able to vote their conscience.

I'd press your "hypocrite" question a bit further:

(1) Person A opposes gay marriage.
(2) Person A votes against gay marriage.
later...
(3) Person A adapts to and lives within a system that legally sanctions gay marriage.

I don't think the conjunction of (1-3) is in any way contradictory and thus is not hypocritical.

It's a very tough question and we Judeo-Christian theists have a lot of thinking and weighing to do.

I tend to waffle depending on which "side" I happen to be reading at the time.

Chris

An honest thoughtful intelligent response. The kind that progresses thinking through and beyond prejudice to acceptance and application of new findings. Such thinking has taken us from the cave to outer space. I am encouraged. Thank you Chris... Roger

[_Some Schmo]

Race is not the same thing as lifestyle, in my opinion. That said, I think all races provide equal benefits to society. Not all behaviors are equally beneficial. Yes, I believe that homosexuals provide equal benefits to society as citizens. I do not believe that homosexual relationships are equally beneficial as heterosexual relationships to society. That is the key difference and that is why: I am a bigot. I guess I'm bigoted against bachelors too though. I think as citizens they also provide equal benefits, but they do not provide the same crucial benefits to society as married heterosexuals.

I stopped reading here to comment, so I don't know if anyone else addressed this but... come on.

I can think of several ways in which homosexual unions would benefit society, as well as bachelors (and unmarried women, for that matter) staying unmarried benefits society.

People play roles in society. Not everyone should be married, and I don't think it serves society well to have people who are married to someone to whom they aren't attracted for some utopian idea that being married is of greater benefit to society. Does it benefit society to have unhappy citizens? Does it benefit society to have fathers that don't want to be fathers? What about all the non-adopted children that could benefit from a loving, stable homosexual-union home?

Thinking that heterosexual unions are the only beneficial ones is incredibly short-sighted. The fact of the matter is that many heterosexual unions are the worst thing that could happen to society, not to mention the cultural pressure to get married. It's about the people involved, not the legal union itself.

[_Some Schmo]

I'm thinking about tax breaks and maybe medical benefits.

You could be right in these two cases, but I'd like to CFR.
I was under the impression that the 'medical' benefits related to one partner being able to use the medical insurance benefit they recieve from their employer on behalf of their partner (who may not work, or who may not receive medical benefits from their own employer). I'm not aware of any benefit the single person would receive as far as medical benefits without any 'partner' to speak of.

I don't know about the tax breaks issue. If you can point it out, I'll happily concede.

Actually, health care coverage (at least, where I work) for single people is significantly cheaper than coverage for a spouse or an entire family.

But yes, there is definitely a tax benefit for being married. However, it certainly is not big enough to encourage a marriage between two people who aren't attracted to each other. As the saying goes, if you marry for money, you end up earning every penny.