Homosexual Marriage and Views on Marriage

[_Moniker]

Perhaps you could identify the "few" posters you are talking about here?

I believe consenting adults should be able to do whatever they feel comfortable doing. Be it straight, gay, polygamy, S&M, incest, hamsters, whatever.

I think minors need to have boundaries and rules until they are capable of making more rational decisions.

Well, you're one that seems fairly uptight about pre-marital sex. We've discussed this before even with adults. You wanted people to wait until marriage, If I recall correctly.

If they comment on here I can elaborate. If they choose not to speak up, I won't.

I agree that minors need to make wise choices, yet, I just don't view abstinence only sex education as something effective or realistic. I think people need to be smart about sex and sometimes we need to be smart by acknowledging most people are going to have pre-marital sex and make certain we teach them how to be careful and not take any risks.

[Anonymous]

I guess I would be considered a non believer (NOM) that still values chastity before marriage and total fidelity. I also voted "no" on Prop 8 but my feelings for supporting gay marriage and chastity are not related to "sin". I do realize the guilt associated with sexuality instilled as a Mormon will always be with me but I've never viewed sex as "ewww."

There are many non religious reasons why I believe marriage (gay or straight) is better for society and our spiritual growth.
If homosexuals are allowed to marry and commit in a stable monogamous relationship that's a good thing for society & their children in my opinion, vs. the promiscuous lifestyle that is so pervasive in that community. There are legal issues with children of homosexuals that also strongly influenced my vote.

[_Some Schmo]

The idea that sex before marriage was a "sin" was actually one of the things that made me question the validity of Mormonism in the first place. I can think of few more ill-advised choices to make than to marry someone without first being intimate with them. It's just plain stupid. Marriage is one of the most important decisions one ever makes, and to enter it without knowing the sexual compatibility of your partner is beyond reason, and is another indicator that religion (Mormonism and any other religion that pushes this belief, at least) is inherently dangerous.

Safe sex has to do with personal responsibility, not marital status.

So for me, the issue is completely unrelated to homosexual marriage. Homosexuals should have sex in and out of marriage, just like everyone else.

[_Scottie]

Well, you're one that seems fairly uptight about pre-marital sex. We've discussed this before even with adults. You wanted people to wait until marriage, If I recall correctly.

I'm not sure I've ever said that?? I do believe that there is danger of emotional issues for anybody who is overly promiscuous. I believe that humans are wired in such a way that they have a very hard time separating sex from emotion and commitment. I know I do.

If they comment on here I can elaborate. If they choose not to speak up, I won't.

Fair enough.

I agree that minors need to make wise choices, yet, I just don't view abstinence only sex education as something effective or realistic. I think people need to be smart about sex and sometimes we need to be smart by acknowledging most people are going to have pre-marital sex and make certain we teach them how to be careful and not take any risks.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about teaching safe sex practices to our children. I don't agree with an abstinence only outlook. But I don't believe that you should abandon any teachings of chastity just because "they're going to do it anyways". I believe that parents should try and teach that abstinence is the best course of action with basically zero risk of pregnancy or STD's. However, should they choose to engage in sex, they should understand the risks -- because there are very real and very substantial risks which could last a lifetime -- and how to minimize those risks. And make sure they know that even minimized risks are not gone. You can still get pregnant with birth control. You can still get an STD with protection. Although difficult, I believe a parent should try and explain the emotional trauma that could occur with underage sex.

I agree that teaching sex as a sin is wrong. It is too hard to a lot of women to suddenly flip the switch from sex being a vile, disgusting sin to a beautiful act between a loving couple.

[_rcrocket]

I agree that teaching sex as a sin is wrong.

Assuming that you are referring to extra-marital sex or homosexual acts, I would say that if you agreed with this notion, there goes St. Paul down the toilet, along with Moses, the author of Proverbs, Ezekiel and others. Not to mention Jesus Christ himself.

[_Scottie]

Assuming that you are referring to extra-marital sex or homosexual acts, I would say that if you agreed with this notion, there goes St. Paul down the toilet, along with Moses, the author of Proverbs, Ezekiel and others. Not to mention Jesus Christ himself.

Yes, extra marital sex.

And, yes, I believe that 2000+ year old men should not dictate how our society lives. They have caused more stagnation of our growth as decent humans than anything else I can think of.

[_Sethbag]

I actually have posited a theory recently on this board that the exact opposite is going on - that TBMs and other religious folks who are so against gay marriage are against it because it it would, in a sense, legitimize gay sex (between spouses). These people cannot accept that gay sex can ever be legitimate, and therefore there cannot be gay marriage. This is because if there were gay marriage and yet gay sex between spouses were still not legitimate, it would undermine the view that marriage legitimizes sex in general.

So, in order to maintain sexual control of heterosexuals within the religious paradigm, without recognizing the legitimacy of gay sex in any circumstance, they must oppose gay marriage.

I'm not sure I could prove that, but I think it's an interesting hypothesis.

[_Bond James Bond]

I actually have posited a theory recently on this board that the exact opposite is going on - that TBMs and other religious folks who are so against gay marriage are against it because it it would, in a sense, legitimize gay sex (between spouses). These people cannot accept that gay sex can ever be legitimate, and therefore there cannot be gay marriage. This is because if there were gay marriage and yet gay sex between spouses were still not legitimate, it would undermine the view that marriage legitimizes sex in general.

So, in order to maintain sexual control of heterosexuals within the religious paradigm, without recognizing the legitimacy of gay sex in any circumstance, they must oppose gay marriage.

I'm not sure I could prove that, but I think it's an interesting hypothesis.

That's what I've been trying to type for 20 minutes. Thanks Seth! [for making feel stoopid ]

[_rcrocket]

Assuming that you are referring to extra-marital sex or homosexual acts, I would say that if you agreed with this notion, there goes St. Paul down the toilet, along with Moses, the author of Proverbs, Ezekiel and others. Not to mention Jesus Christ himself.

Yes, extra marital sex.

And, yes, I believe that 2000+ year old men should not dictate how our society lives. They have caused more stagnation of our growth as decent humans than anything else I can think of.

Your issue is with Christian mores and ethics, as well as ethical systems based upon evolutionary biology. Since no ethical system constrains you, why bother here?

[_Scottie]

Your issue is with Christian mores and ethics, as well as ethical systems based upon evolutionary biology. Since no ethical system constrains you, why bother here?

Ahh yes, the ol' "I don't believe in God or Biblical morals, therefore I must have no morals."

Did I not just explain that human nature seems to favor monogamous relationships? So, while I don't see extra marital sex as a sin, I do believe promiscuous sex can be dangerous. I also agree with what Schmo said. Anybody who enters marriage without being intimate is an idiot!! You HAVE to see if you are sexually compatible.

You can enter a commitment long before marriage, in which case I think sex is fine.