Chit Chat

Why not divorce?

First off, damn you The Knot! I wrote out this entire post and it not only didn't post, but it also disapeared, so here I am rewriting it. Grrr...

Anywho, I have a sincere question for those of you out there who oppose gay marriage based on religious beliefs; specifically Christian beliefs.

I understand the religious argument against gay marriage. I've seem Leviticus; I've heard the argument that although lots of stuff is considered a sin in the Bible, some don't count anymore but this one does because reasons. I got it.

But what about divorce? There are 18 different Bible passages in the Old and New Testament condemning divorce. To divorce and remarry is to commit adultery; which is on of the Ten Commandments. It seems to me that divorce is condemned significantly more than homosexuality in the Bible. Homosexuality isn't even one of the Ten Commandments.

So why aren't Christians who are publicly opposed to gay marriage also publicly opposed to divorce? Why aren't those who are campaigning against gay marriage also campaigning to make divorce illegal? If baking a cake for a gay couple makes them complicit in sin, why aren't they also refusing to bake cakes for second and third marriages in order to not be complicit in their sin of adultery?

«1

Re: Why not divorce?

  • l9il9i member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper
    I had someone on my newsfeed that was horrified by the decision because "it's ruining marriage, just look at the divorce rate".  

    Agreed with Scribe, people don't like sense lol.
  • Lol. I'm legitimately curious. Unfortunately, or actually, I should say fortunately, my religious friends either support gay marriage or just accept it based on the fact that it's a civil decision. So I have no one to ask IRL.
  • First off, damn you The Knot! I wrote out this entire post and it not only didn't post, but it also disapeared, so here I am rewriting it. Grrr...

    Anywho, I have a sincere question for those of you out there who oppose gay marriage based on religious beliefs; specifically Christian beliefs.

    I understand the religious argument against gay marriage. I've seem Leviticus; I've heard the argument that although lots of stuff is considered a sin in the Bible, some don't count anymore but this one does because reasons. I got it.

    But what about divorce? There are 18 different Bible passages in the Old and New Testament condemning divorce. To divorce and remarry is to commit adultery; which is on of the Ten Commandments. It seems to me that divorce is condemned significantly more than homosexuality in the Bible. Homosexuality isn't even one of the Ten Commandments.

    So why aren't Christians who are publicly opposed to gay marriage also publicly opposed to divorce? Why aren't those who are campaigning against gay marriage also campaigning to make divorce illegal? If baking a cake for a gay couple makes them complicit in sin, why aren't they also refusing to bake cakes for second and third marriages in order to not be complicit in their sin of adultery?

    I don't think TK has the kind of people you want to ask.  If it does, they're lurkers and won't respond.
  • I am not religious, but I can totally answer this: People like to pick and choose what they want to follow. I think there are ALOT of things in the bible that the majority of christians dont follow, they just like to make homosexuality a sticking point
    image
  • One of my gay friends is a devout Christian, born and raised. If marriage is really based on God and religion, then she should have a right to get married and I should not, since I'm atheist. Or at least in my mind that's how it works out. I never understood that. 

    Why are gay people ruining marriage but not atheists? 
    I don't even understand how marriage is being ruined. What's ruined about it? Why are these people going on about "ruining marriage" with no explanation of what has actually been ruined. Straight people are still getting married. No one's marriages are invalid now. Pretty sure marriage is just fine and dandy.
  • I can't answer this, since I have no problem with either.  However, I would guess that it's cos divorce doesn't make people as uncomfortable as gay marriage.  Divorce is more social acceptable than being gay though 50-60 years ago it wasn't, and people were having the same argument back then about how divorce was ruining marriage.  Also, many people I've known who are against gay marriage seem to be worried that gay people will try to seduce them, hit on them, ask them out, etc., and they're scared of being seen in those circles.  They don't seem to understand that gay people aren't going to be too interested in straight people who think they're going to hell and probably won't want to date them.  I'm pretty sure that the same people who are against gay marriage and the sam who would shave been against divorce 60 years ago too.  Plus as others have said, it's more convenient to jump on a bandwagon versus being debated about your thoughts and choices.  

    On another note, and to thread jack here, @vulgargirl @queerfemme and anyone else, maybe you ladies can answer this for me.  DH and I were discussing the different terms used in the LGBTQ acronym during Pride week.  He didn't understand why there was a differentiation between gay, lesbian and queer.  I said that I thought gay was used more by men, lesbian more by women and queer was all encompassing, and we started talking about the spectrum of sexuality too.  But I really have no idea if I got any of that right or not, so can someone with more knowledge than me please clarify when each is used?  

  • One of my gay friends is a devout Christian, born and raised. If marriage is really based on God and religion, then she should have a right to get married and I should not, since I'm atheist. Or at least in my mind that's how it works out. I never understood that. 

    Why are gay people ruining marriage but not atheists? 
    I don't even understand how marriage is being ruined. What's ruined about it? Why are these people going on about "ruining marriage" with no explanation of what has actually been ruined. Straight people are still getting married. No one's marriages are invalid now. Pretty sure marriage is just fine and dandy.
    Hey don't ask them to explain such things in a logical manner or define the terms they use. Then the whole thing falls apart. 
    image
  • twoleighstwoleighs member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper
    edited June 2015
    I obviously can't speak for all Christians/churches, but when my parents got divorced, my entire family was pretty much exiled from the church.  Sure, they couldn't tell us to quit coming, but they made it abundantly clear that's what they were thinking.  I don't know if I've really ever recovered from that.  

    The same question could be asked of greed or gluttony, etc..  

    Unfortunately, the Christian voices that are heard are most often the judgmental ones.  I don't think *all* Christians think the way we're presented (I don't).

    WinstonsGirl  and I'd like to think in another 50-60 years we'll be asking what's the big deal about gay marriage and the world will have moved on to a new "issue"
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    image

  • One of my gay friends is a devout Christian, born and raised. If marriage is really based on God and religion, then she should have a right to get married and I should not, since I'm atheist. Or at least in my mind that's how it works out. I never understood that. 

    Why are gay people ruining marriage but not atheists? 
    I come from a family of atheists. We get married at astounding rates. Marriage was originally a contract between two families to increase land and provisions. It had not much to do with religion other than solidifying bloodlines and land.

  • twoleighs said:
    I obviously can't speak for all Christians/churches, but when my parents got divorced, my entire family was pretty much exiled from the church.  Sure, they couldn't tell us to quit coming, but they made it abundantly clear that's what they were thinking.  I don't know if I've really ever recovered from that.  

    The same question could be asked of greed or gluttony, etc..  

    Unfortunately, the Christian voices that are heard are most often the judgmental ones.  


    I think this is where my question stems from. My parents don't take communion at Church because my dad was married previously. Growing up in Catholic School it was made very clear to me that divorce was an "excommunication from the Church" worthy sin. So I just don't get how people who are so vocal against gay marriage can just look the other way in regards to divorce. I get that it's been legal in one way or another since around the 1700s but if you're going to argue that gay marriage shouldn't be legal because "insert religious reason here and/or Bible passage" then you must also feel the same way about divorce.

    Otherwise, aren't you just a hypocrite? Is it really a religious thing then, or is it as @VulgarGirl said, it just makes them uncomfortable? So they're using the Bible as a weapon against others just because they don't like it?

  • l9il9i member
    First Anniversary 5 Love Its First Comment Name Dropper


    One of my gay friends is a devout Christian, born and raised. If marriage is really based on God and religion, then she should have a right to get married and I should not, since I'm atheist. Or at least in my mind that's how it works out. I never understood that. 

    Why are gay people ruining marriage but not atheists? 
    I come from a family of atheists. We get married at astounding rates. Marriage was originally a contract between two families to increase land and provisions. It had not much to do with religion other than solidifying bloodlines and land.

    I love when people say they only support "traditional marriage".  They clearly don't understand that marriage has evolved drastically over the course of time and will continue to evolve.
  • I think it has more to do that, at least in this country, divorce has always been around. Sure there was a sigma, but it has always been an option here.  When new immigrants came to this country they were happy to be able to practice their religion with persecution, the fact that the country legally allowed divorce wasn't an issue for them individually.  If they were Catholic or Orthodox Jew, they still condemn divorce and make it really hard within the religions to get one. 

    As time went on it was a norm.  It would be hard to gain any support for laws to get rid of divorce.   Besides who is going to support not being able to divorce their beating spouse?   Tough sell regardless of their religion.  

    It's also hard to make something legal (and has been for 200+ years), now illegal.  It took a war to get rid of slavery.  It took Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka to start getting rid of segregation.   They tried prohibition only to have it a big fat fail.

    Divorce has been around for so long it would be next to impossible to pass a law making it illegal here in the states.  They will never win.



    Homosexuality acts have been and still is illegal in some states  (well, laws on the books, but not sure it's enforced). A lot of religions were against homosexuality (even ones who accept them now). Homosexulality has only recently been "accepted".  Homosexuals make up a small percentage of the population.   It's easy for the Christian right to bully this group of people.    People fight for what they think they can win. They fear the unknown. They don't like change. They think well it's been illegal for so long, why change?   They are just plain assholes. 

     Of course, people pick and choose what they want to believe too. 










    What differentiates an average host and a great host is anticipating unexpressed needs and wants of their guests.  Just because the want/need is not expressed, doesn't mean it wouldn't be appreciated. 
  • adk19 said:

    First off, damn you The Knot! I wrote out this entire post and it not only didn't post, but it also disapeared, so here I am rewriting it. Grrr...

    Anywho, I have a sincere question for those of you out there who oppose gay marriage based on religious beliefs; specifically Christian beliefs.

    I understand the religious argument against gay marriage. I've seem Leviticus; I've heard the argument that although lots of stuff is considered a sin in the Bible, some don't count anymore but this one does because reasons. I got it.

    But what about divorce? There are 18 different Bible passages in the Old and New Testament condemning divorce. To divorce and remarry is to commit adultery; which is on of the Ten Commandments. It seems to me that divorce is condemned significantly more than homosexuality in the Bible. Homosexuality isn't even one of the Ten Commandments.

    So why aren't Christians who are publicly opposed to gay marriage also publicly opposed to divorce? Why aren't those who are campaigning against gay marriage also campaigning to make divorce illegal? If baking a cake for a gay couple makes them complicit in sin, why aren't they also refusing to bake cakes for second and third marriages in order to not be complicit in their sin of adultery?

    I don't think TK has the kind of people you want to ask.  If it does, they're lurkers and won't respond.

    I should go ask on The Nest. Lol. I went over there yesterday for the first time and saw quite a few conservatives in the politics board. I was super excited to post about political stuff, because that's kind of my thing, until I saw there was a Ben Carson post, and people were posting about how great he is. That was enough to make me close the window.
  • I am what I consider a more liberal republican.  (does that even exist?  LOL).  I am so happy that the SCOTUS did the right thing because I truly believe in the separation of Church and State, something our more conservative figures have forgotten all about. They also forget that this country wasn't founded by Christians, but also by Quakers, Puritans, and Protestants who were looking for religious freedom.  

    With this ruling, the US Supreme Court is not telling Churches that they have to marry the LGBTQ population, it is only saying that it is unconstitutional in the governments eyes to not do so which I agree with.  Everyone deserves to be happy and live a happy life with the person they love, regardless of color, age, or sexual preference.

    The sanctity of marriage is not ruined (in my eyes) by the LGBTQ population, but rather by people who marry and divorce so quickly.   I'm sorry but if Kim K can marry and divorce in 72 days, then the LGBTQ population should be able to do so as well.  

    In terms of divorce, I personally don't believe in it.  I will fight tooth and nail to save my marriage if it ever came down to that and luckily DH agrees as we had this conversation before we were married.  
    One thing about the conservative Republican Party is that they are never consistent and always twist everything to suit their needs at that moment.
    Anniversary



    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • One of my gay friends is a devout Christian, born and raised. If marriage is really based on God and religion, then she should have a right to get married and I should not, since I'm atheist. Or at least in my mind that's how it works out. I never understood that. 

    Why are gay people ruining marriage but not atheists? 
    I come from a family of atheists. We get married at astounding rates. Marriage was originally a contract between two families to increase land and provisions. It had not much to do with religion other than solidifying bloodlines and land.

    That's why the argument confuses me so much, I guess. When I hear anti-gay marriage people spouting all this religious stuff I always think "Um... but what about atheists? They get married." I mean really, to look at any anti-gay marriage arguments from a logical standpoint, none of them make any sense. I think it boils down to simple disgusting bigotry and ignorance. 
    image
  • lyndausvi said:
    I think it has more to do that, at least in this country, divorce has always been around. Sure there was a sigma, but it has always been an option here.  When new immigrants came to this country they were happy to be able to practice their religion with persecution, the fact that the country legally allowed divorce wasn't an issue for them individually.  If they were Catholic or Orthodox Jew, they still condemn divorce and make it really hard within the religions to get one. 

    As time went on it was a norm.  It would be hard to gain any support for laws to get rid of divorce.   Besides who is going to support not being able to divorce their beating spouse?   Tough sell regardless of their religion.  

    It's also hard to make something legal (and has been for 200+ years), now illegal.  It took a war to get rid of slavery.  It took Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka to start getting rid of segregation.   They tried prohibition only to have it a big fat fail.

    Divorce has been around for so long it would be next to impossible to pass a law making it illegal here in the states.  They will never win.



    Homosexuality acts have been and still is illegal in some states  (well, laws on the books, but not sure it's enforced). A lot of religions were against homosexuality (even ones who accept them now). Homosexulality has only recently been "accepted".  Homosexuals make up a small percentage of the population.   It's easy for the Christian right to bully this group of people.    People fight for what they think they can win. They fear the unknown. They don't like change. They think well it's been illegal for so long, why change?   They are just plain assholes. 

     Of course, people pick and choose what they want to believe too. 



    BOX BOX BOX

    The other aspect is that in order to get an annulment in the church, you must also be divorced.   And an annulment in civil court doesn't equal a Catholic annulment.   So there's no other way (unless someone more versed in Canon law can school me) to show that the marriage was deemed invalid.



  • ohmrs2014 said:
    I am what I consider a more liberal republican.  (does that even exist?  LOL).  I am so happy that the SCOTUS did the right thing because I truly believe in the separation of Church and State, something our more conservative figures have forgotten all about. They also forget that this country wasn't founded by Christians, but also by Quakers, Puritans, and Protestants who were looking for religious freedom.  

    With this ruling, the US Supreme Court is not telling Churches that they have to marry the LGBTQ population, it is only saying that it is unconstitutional in the governments eyes to not do so which I agree with.  Everyone deserves to be happy and live a happy life with the person they love, regardless of color, age, or sexual preference.

    The sanctity of marriage is not ruined (in my eyes) by the LGBTQ population, but rather by people who marry and divorce so quickly.   I'm sorry but if Kim K can marry and divorce in 72 days, then the LGBTQ population should be able to do so as well.  

    In terms of divorce, I personally don't believe in it.  I will fight tooth and nail to save my marriage if it ever came down to that and luckily DH agrees as we had this conversation before we were married.  
    One thing about the conservative Republican Party is that they are never consistent and always twist everything to suit their needs at that moment.
    Bolded - sorry this is a pet peeve of mine - Christians = anyone who believes in Jesus as the Savior - hence protestants, Quakers, Puritans - all Christians.  Protestents = any Christian faith NOT Catholic.

    The problem is that the Religious Right thinks that laws in this country should be Christian faith based.  They are insist that their morality is the only/best morality and that is how everyone should live.  They pick and choose what parts of the Bible they will adhere to and condemn others for.  Until the Christian Right starts actually living like Christians, this debate and others will continue.
    Ditto that it's a peeve of mine as well.   There are also Christian denominations that are fine with same sex marriage however they aren't as large as some of the others (Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, etc).   
  • banana468 said:
    ohmrs2014 said:
    I am what I consider a more liberal republican.  (does that even exist?  LOL).  I am so happy that the SCOTUS did the right thing because I truly believe in the separation of Church and State, something our more conservative figures have forgotten all about. They also forget that this country wasn't founded by Christians, but also by Quakers, Puritans, and Protestants who were looking for religious freedom.  

    With this ruling, the US Supreme Court is not telling Churches that they have to marry the LGBTQ population, it is only saying that it is unconstitutional in the governments eyes to not do so which I agree with.  Everyone deserves to be happy and live a happy life with the person they love, regardless of color, age, or sexual preference.

    The sanctity of marriage is not ruined (in my eyes) by the LGBTQ population, but rather by people who marry and divorce so quickly.   I'm sorry but if Kim K can marry and divorce in 72 days, then the LGBTQ population should be able to do so as well.  

    In terms of divorce, I personally don't believe in it.  I will fight tooth and nail to save my marriage if it ever came down to that and luckily DH agrees as we had this conversation before we were married.  
    One thing about the conservative Republican Party is that they are never consistent and always twist everything to suit their needs at that moment.
    Bolded - sorry this is a pet peeve of mine - Christians = anyone who believes in Jesus as the Savior - hence protestants, Quakers, Puritans - all Christians.  Protestents = any Christian faith NOT Catholic.

    The problem is that the Religious Right thinks that laws in this country should be Christian faith based.  They are insist that their morality is the only/best morality and that is how everyone should live.  They pick and choose what parts of the Bible they will adhere to and condemn others for.  Until the Christian Right starts actually living like Christians, this debate and others will continue.
    Ditto that it's a peeve of mine as well.   There are also Christian denominations that are fine with same sex marriage however they aren't as large as some of the others (Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, etc).   
    @banana468 - I've actually heard people say "I'm not Christian, I'm Catholic".  Oh the face palms hurt that day.

     

  • banana468 said:
    ohmrs2014 said:
    I am what I consider a more liberal republican.  (does that even exist?  LOL).  I am so happy that the SCOTUS did the right thing because I truly believe in the separation of Church and State, something our more conservative figures have forgotten all about. They also forget that this country wasn't founded by Christians, but also by Quakers, Puritans, and Protestants who were looking for religious freedom.  

    With this ruling, the US Supreme Court is not telling Churches that they have to marry the LGBTQ population, it is only saying that it is unconstitutional in the governments eyes to not do so which I agree with.  Everyone deserves to be happy and live a happy life with the person they love, regardless of color, age, or sexual preference.

    The sanctity of marriage is not ruined (in my eyes) by the LGBTQ population, but rather by people who marry and divorce so quickly.   I'm sorry but if Kim K can marry and divorce in 72 days, then the LGBTQ population should be able to do so as well.  

    In terms of divorce, I personally don't believe in it.  I will fight tooth and nail to save my marriage if it ever came down to that and luckily DH agrees as we had this conversation before we were married.  
    One thing about the conservative Republican Party is that they are never consistent and always twist everything to suit their needs at that moment.
    Bolded - sorry this is a pet peeve of mine - Christians = anyone who believes in Jesus as the Savior - hence protestants, Quakers, Puritans - all Christians.  Protestents = any Christian faith NOT Catholic.

    The problem is that the Religious Right thinks that laws in this country should be Christian faith based.  They are insist that their morality is the only/best morality and that is how everyone should live.  They pick and choose what parts of the Bible they will adhere to and condemn others for.  Until the Christian Right starts actually living like Christians, this debate and others will continue.
    Ditto that it's a peeve of mine as well.   There are also Christian denominations that are fine with same sex marriage however they aren't as large as some of the others (Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, etc).   
    @banana468 - I've actually heard people say "I'm not Christian, I'm Catholic".  Oh the face palms hurt that day.

    Sorry everyone.  You guys are right and I realized I should have stated it more along the lines of "founded by many denominations of Christian faiths."

    Sorry if I offended anyone.
    Anniversary



    Baby Birthday Ticker Ticker
  • banana468 said:
    ohmrs2014 said:
    I am what I consider a more liberal republican.  (does that even exist?  LOL).  I am so happy that the SCOTUS did the right thing because I truly believe in the separation of Church and State, something our more conservative figures have forgotten all about. They also forget that this country wasn't founded by Christians, but also by Quakers, Puritans, and Protestants who were looking for religious freedom.  

    With this ruling, the US Supreme Court is not telling Churches that they have to marry the LGBTQ population, it is only saying that it is unconstitutional in the governments eyes to not do so which I agree with.  Everyone deserves to be happy and live a happy life with the person they love, regardless of color, age, or sexual preference.

    The sanctity of marriage is not ruined (in my eyes) by the LGBTQ population, but rather by people who marry and divorce so quickly.   I'm sorry but if Kim K can marry and divorce in 72 days, then the LGBTQ population should be able to do so as well.  

    In terms of divorce, I personally don't believe in it.  I will fight tooth and nail to save my marriage if it ever came down to that and luckily DH agrees as we had this conversation before we were married.  
    One thing about the conservative Republican Party is that they are never consistent and always twist everything to suit their needs at that moment.
    Bolded - sorry this is a pet peeve of mine - Christians = anyone who believes in Jesus as the Savior - hence protestants, Quakers, Puritans - all Christians.  Protestents = any Christian faith NOT Catholic.

    The problem is that the Religious Right thinks that laws in this country should be Christian faith based.  They are insist that their morality is the only/best morality and that is how everyone should live.  They pick and choose what parts of the Bible they will adhere to and condemn others for.  Until the Christian Right starts actually living like Christians, this debate and others will continue.
    Ditto that it's a peeve of mine as well.   There are also Christian denominations that are fine with same sex marriage however they aren't as large as some of the others (Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, etc).   
    @banana468 - I've actually heard people say "I'm not Christian, I'm Catholic".  Oh the face palms hurt that day.
    I very frequently run into the converse of this- non-Catholic people who absolutely refuse to believe that Catholics are Christian. My impression is that this is a commonly held view in a lot of African American communities in particular, though I have no idea why.
  • @WinstonsGirl, so...the umbrella has gotten big. LGBTQ (and sometimes there are more letters), stands for lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, and queer. So lesbians are pretty much all women, gay is used for both gay men and sometimes lesbians use the word too (I do), bisexuals are...the bisexuals, trans are the trans people, and then we get to queer.

    So queer. In the acronym LGBTQ, queer often stands for people who identify as panasexual, demisexual, asexual, queer. Kind of ect, al. If you feel what you identify as belongs here, you are encompassed in this letter. Some people do identify as being queer. They simply state that they could fall for anyone regardless of gender but don't feel bisexual/pansexual is the right label for them either.

    I use the word queer (and others do as well) as all encompassing word to describe the community as a whole. We're the queer community. Whatever we are, gay or lesbian, or bi, or pan, or demi, or ace, or queer, or trans, or two spirited, or whatever label you want to call yourself. We're the queer community. Queer means different or weird. Talk to someone about how they felt before they realized they were not straight, and most of them will say "I felt different" or "I knew I was weird". So we're the queers. We're the weirdos and the freaks and the kids who were different at our core and couldn't figure out the word. So I like the word queer.

    Of course there are also assholes who use it in a derogatory manner. Fuck queer. Goddamn queers. Fuck you, you're a fucking queer. Well fuck them. I'm a fucking queer. They're goddamn right I am. And I am not ashamed of that fact. I am a fucking queer and I am fucking proud to be one. 


    I use queer because I don't identify as a lesbian.  My partner is non-gender conforming and IDs a trans and uses masculine pronouns.  I am primarily attracted to non-gender conforming folks, so "lesbian" doesn't really fit for me and my identification.   So, I ID myself a queer, because lesbian...  well, that's women who are into women...  and I'm into masculine butches. So... it just doesn't sound right to me.   

    Also, the "Q" is also sometimes used as "questioning".   that's why you'll see two "q"s sometimes.  
    Yes I forgot the questioning peeps! 
  • Thanks @Vulgargirl and @Queerfemme.  Glad to know I had the right idea.  And I hadn't even thought of Questioning, so I can add that to our discussion.  

  • lyndausvi said:
    I think it has more to do that, at least in this country, divorce has always been around. Sure there was a sigma, but it has always been an option here.  When new immigrants came to this country they were happy to be able to practice their religion with persecution, the fact that the country legally allowed divorce wasn't an issue for them individually.  If they were Catholic or Orthodox Jew, they still condemn divorce and make it really hard within the religions to get one. 

    As time went on it was a norm.  It would be hard to gain any support for laws to get rid of divorce.   Besides who is going to support not being able to divorce their beating spouse?   Tough sell regardless of their religion.  

    It's also hard to make something legal (and has been for 200+ years), now illegal.  It took a war to get rid of slavery.  It took Brown vs the Board of Education of Topeka to start getting rid of segregation.   They tried prohibition only to have it a big fat fail.

    Divorce has been around for so long it would be next to impossible to pass a law making it illegal here in the states.  They will never win.



    Homosexuality acts have been and still is illegal in some states  (well, laws on the books, but not sure it's enforced). A lot of religions were against homosexuality (even ones who accept them now). Homosexulality has only recently been "accepted".  Homosexuals make up a small percentage of the population.   It's easy for the Christian right to bully this group of people.    People fight for what they think they can win. They fear the unknown. They don't like change. They think well it's been illegal for so long, why change?   They are just plain assholes. 

     Of course, people pick and choose what they want to believe too. 




    Totally not the point, but that's not true anymore. In Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court found state laws prohibiting homosexual acts unconstitutional in the early 2000's. It actually made its way to the SC because it was enforced. (Side note, it was also released on June 26. Most landmark SCOTUS decisions are released in late June, but it's still a neat coincidence.) Still, it's legal to fire someone for being gay or trans in something like half the states; the fight for equality is long from over.

    I agree with Lynda though. I think the hypocrisy in condemning same sex marriages while ignoring divorce has quite a bit to do with the notion that divorce has been part of our society for as long as anyone can remember, and is sort of seen as just the way it is. The right thinks (or thought) they could still "win" this one. 

    It would be nice if one of these people would show up and actually answer, but I don't see that happening. 
This discussion has been closed.
Choose Another Board
Search Boards