But I also feel it is against Jesus's teachings to discriminate against anyone. I totally support the Matthew Shepard Act and repealing DADT. Homophobia is a sin as well.
The argument anti-gay marriage folks have is that gays are the threat to traditional marriage. I always thought adultery and divorce were. Hmmm.
I have worked with gays and lesbians in the workplace, never been a problem. The lesbians have never hit on me and the gay men never made a pass at other men.
In November Minnesota will be voting on a gay marriage amendment. I have not decided how I'm going to vote on that yet. I know a lot of people, including a gay hospital chaplain who are in favor of it. And I know a lot of people who are against it.
Your thoughts?
How about voting that anyone can marry the consenting adult of their choice?
ReplyDeleteI'm also a straight female who understands that if I were a lesbian, that is what I would be.
As a person who married the love of my life 10 years ago, I thing everyone should have their own chance to do the same, legally and without discrimination.
SPHASH -- thank you for this straightforward and honest post. I appreciate hearing how you feel about same sex marriage and offering a forum for us to discuss it.
ReplyDeleteMy two cents... :-)
As you mention in your post, I think it's important to recognize that because someone is gay, it does not mean that he or she is indiscriminate in his or her dealings with folks of the same gender. Meaning, I don't assume my lesbian coworkers will hit on me any more than I'd assume the same about a male coworker.
I am really proud of our President. I knew early on that he was for civil unions but wasn't too crazy about same sex marriage. This shows an incredible growth for him and I hope folks recognize it.
The thing about the vote -- people will be gay and in long term, committed relationships whether or not folks vote yea or nay in November. Isn't allowing these people the same rights heterosexual couples have the Christian thing to do?
Thanks again for the chance to express my thoughts.
Should have specified "straight male coworker" in my post above.
DeleteSPASH, I respect your opinion but since you asked what we thought I'll simply ask you when did you decide you wanted to be straight? Like most heterosexuals, you'll say it wasn't a decision just as it isn't a decision that homosexuals make. I've read many books on the topic, mainly due to CEU's for nursing but also due to an interest in what makes people tick. I never decided to be straight or that I was going to be physically attracted to men, I was born that way. The same holds true for homosexuals. Because of this, I think it's downright cruel to discriminate against them and tell them they cannot marry the person they love whether they are the same sex or not.
ReplyDeleteAllowing gays to marry will not impact my marriage anymore than someone who is straight getting a divorce impacts my marriage. Would you want someone you loved and cared about to be prevented from marrying the person they loved, from sharing their life with them and receiving all the benefits a straight married couple does? I wouldn't. However, I have a nephew who is gay and a first cousin who is gay and both are in long term relationships, one of which will be celebrating their 25th anniversary. How nice it would be for them if they were able to be legally recognized as a couple after living together and raising a wonderful daughter and son, owning their home and business and yet, society dictates that their relationship is somehow less than others due to them being the same sex. How sad that we have yet to fully accept others as they are.
AKRNHSNC I've always been straight because I was born that way. What I meant was if you could choose your sexual orientation I would be straight because that is all I've ever known. I should have made myself more clear on that.
ReplyDeleteYou are either born straight or gay. Sexual orientation is not a choice.
The Bible actually gives conflicting views on homosexuality. In the Old Testament particularly Leviticus it says homosexuality is wrong. However in the New Testament Jesus doesn't say anything about it, except for sexual immorality which I'm guessing would be adultery and promiscuity.
DeleteLike President Obama my views are evolving. I'm just not as far as he is yet.
SPHASH - The Bible is man-made. That's why it has conflicting views.
Deletemy policy with regard to personal choices other people make is that if it has no impact on me, then i am not opposed to it. i believe that is the policy that any government should also take. i don't understand how allowing gay people to marry their partners has any negative impact on any governmental interest at all. the greater harm is done by those of all sexual orientations, married or not, who have or adopt children, and then abandon their children for whatever reason (i.e. do not provide emotional and financial support for them). children who have undergone this type of abandonment often grow up to have a plethora of emotional problems and create many, many social problems. if the government wants to get into the business of regulating personal decisions that impact the government then why don't they more closely regulate this personal decision since the societal consequences can be more devastating and widespread than any decision regarding who to marry? i.e. why don't we amend our constitutions to require potential parents to take classes, tests, psychological batteries or etc. in order to have or adopt children? i know the answer - because it would be unenforceable, not to mention highly intrusive upon personal liberties. the same can be said for regulating gay marriage.
ReplyDeleteBlond hair and blue eyes do not bother me, nor do black hair and brown eyes. Tall people do not frighten me, nor do short people. Heterosexuals do not offend me, nor do homosexuals. It is all genetic.
ReplyDeleteWhat possible difference could any of it make?
Sometimes children discern nature´s true laws better than adults. This is one of those times.
Marriage is a contract put simply. If you were to take the religious right argument one step further, any one who was married by a Judge or justice of the peace. Would not really be married because religion was not part of the contract. When people talk about traditional marriage I am not really sure what their point is. Traditional marriage laws are all about protecting property, is that really what we want marriage to be about?
ReplyDeleteWhy would anyone want to stop to people from entering a contract that offers many benefits and rights? No one is saying that gay marriage also has to take place in a religious context.
I think your response to one of the comments indicates that your ambivalence stems from your personal religious beliefs. I understand that. However, the question on the ballot is not what God thinks of gay marriage (whatever God you believe in) but whether the state should be able to deny such basic rights to a group of people for no apparent reason, other than the religious beliefs of some people. I think the answer to that, under our Constitution, has to be no. The government should not be able to pick and choose people's rights based on religious beliefs, especially given that many religious belief systems have no problem with gay marriage at all. The government's recognition of those rights is completely separate from your personal belief.
ReplyDeleteI am a Christian. That's why I believe love is love. Period. Regardless of gender, sexual orientation. Jesus was for love. He proved it, too.
ReplyDeleteSPHASH wrote: "As a Christian I'm not on board with homosexuality."
ReplyDeleteSeriously? Please indicate where Christ (your inspiration, exemplar, and Lord) said anything whatsoever about homosexuality.
Since you're not "on board" with non-heterosexuality, don't practice it. Easy solution!
Civil marriage is a fundamental right guaranteed to Americans by the United States Constitution (see Loving v. Virginia). Religion has nothing to do with it. I'm surprised you don't acknowledge this and -- like Sarah Palin -- wish to impose your personal religious beliefs on your fellow citizens and consider it acceptable to put their basic rights up to popular vote.
Anon at 6:12-
ReplyDeleteRead Leviticus.
If you don't like my Christian beliefs then don't visit this blog OK?
SPHASH wrote: "Read Leviticus."
ReplyDeleteI have. I assume you mean the Leviticus that requires that blasphemers, adulterers, and perpetrators of incest be put to death. The Leviticus that prohibits the eating of shellfish and pork. The Leviticus that outlaws wearing clothes containing multiple types of fabric. The Leviticus that condones slavery. If we're discussing the same Leviticus, do you, "as a Christian," abide by all of that book's admonitions? Or just the verses that condemn male -- although not female -- homosexuality?
SPHASH wrote: "If you don't like my Christian beliefs then don't visit this blog OK?"
I neither like nor dislike your "Christian beliefs" (whatever they may be, depending on your denomination or degree of orthodoxy). What concerns me, however, is your apparent conviction that personal religious tenets should be imposed on citizens in a civil society by the state.
You asked for our thoughts on this topic. These are mine and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the issue.