Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prussia4)
    Marriage should be between a man and woman. It's a religious ceremony and also its against nature to be gay, as they can't reproduce. I suppose it's a disease in a way.
    It's a civil institution, not a religious one. Also what about if a man and woman get married but are unable to conceive due to medical issues (woman had to have her ovaries removed?).Why is it against nature to be gay when hundreds of species of animal (and humans are animals biologically) have homosexual relationships too?I'm simply curious, you are entitled to an opinion
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Prussia4)
    Marriage should be between a man and woman. It's a religious ceremony and also its against nature to be gay, as they can't reproduce. I suppose it's a disease in a way.
    Given that the majority of countries these days struggle with overpopulation in one way or another, a natural system that means a certain percentage of people will not reproduce (i.e. are gay) seems like evolution at it's best, and so the opposite of a disease. Therefore at a scientific level, it is beneficial to us as a species to have homosexualality (and of course all the other elements of the LGBT+ spectrum). It is a completely natural thing.

    Taking the issue from a more 'human' level, I see no issues with deviating from what we may have held as traditions in the past. We can't necessarily force people to hold ceremonies for gay marriage, but the people opposing it have no right to stop others from partaking in it, especially as it is a civil institution, not a religious one (though this has been mentioned many times already).
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I'm a Christian who sees a clear divide between moral and civil law. I believe that God created the institute of marriage, and that He intended marriage for one man and one woman. I believe that homosexual behaviour (not attraction) is wrong, as defined by God's moral law.

    What God says is right and wrong is perfect, because He is perfect. Any civil law that we create is never going to be perfect: in a democracy, in fact, it is rarely anything other than popular consensus. I therefore do not care what civil law says about marriage, and would not expend energy opposing any further changes to our laws.

    Any person who does not believe in God, or rejects Him, is inevitably going to regard marriage as a civil institute only - and in a sense, this is true, as determined by the participants' attitudes, just as if I were to marry, it would be primarily a religious rather than civil act because I chose that it be so.

    If I had untold power, then I could hypothetically force people to comply with the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman only. This would also be futile, because it would do absolutely nothing to solve anyone's deepest need. I believe said need to be redemption by and relationship with God; and this is something that nobody can be forced into. As John Milton suggests, 'God left free the will', and even He himself will not force anybody to come to relationship with Him if they do not want to.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Regardless of personal or religious beliefs, everyone should support gay marriage. Even if you think homosexuality is wrong, it's nobody's right to decide who should be allowed to form a legal union with whom in the name of love.

    People should be able to love whoever they want. As long as it's two consenting adults, who are you - or any government - to decide that's illegitimate?

    I respect homophobic people's right to believe what they want, but I have 0 respect for them.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GraingerTown)
    I'm a Christian who sees a clear divide between moral and civil law. I believe that God created the institute of marriage, and that He intended marriage for one man and one woman. I believe that homosexual behaviour (not attraction) is wrong, as defined by God's moral law.

    What God says is right and wrong is perfect, because He is perfect. Any civil law that we create is never going to be perfect: in a democracy, in fact, it is rarely anything other than popular consensus. I therefore do not care what civil law says about marriage, and would not expend energy opposing any further changes to our laws.

    Any person who does not believe in God, or rejects Him, is inevitably going to regard marriage as a civil institute only - and in a sense, this is true, as determined by the participants' attitudes, just as if I were to marry, it would be primarily a religious rather than civil act because I chose that it be so.

    If I had untold power, then I could hypothetically force people to comply with the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman only. This would also be futile, because it would do absolutely nothing to solve anyone's deepest need. I believe said need to be redemption by and relationship with God; and this is something that nobody can be forced into. As John Milton suggests, 'God left free the will', and even He himself will not force anybody to come to relationship with Him if they do not want to.
    This is such a great way to explain it! As a Christian i always find it hard to explain why i'm against gay marriage without being burned at the stake by everyone!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Cliobatchelor)
    What "Issue." There is no issue with anything like that. You should be asking what are your views on heterosexual marriage because those relationships have had the most probelms
    I'm not entirely sure I understand your argument - I think the word "issue" is a matter of semantics more than anything else, it is just being used to describe "the discussion about whether we should allow gay marriage".

    Also I'm not sure what you're trying to say about heterosexual marriages either - since when is there any evidence to suggest a difference in the amount of problems a couple has based on their sexuality?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GraingerTown)
    I'm a Christian who sees a clear divide between moral and civil law. I believe that God created the institute of marriage, and that He intended marriage for one man and one woman. I believe that homosexual behaviour (not attraction) is wrong, as defined by God's moral law.

    What God says is right and wrong is perfect, because He is perfect. Any civil law that we create is never going to be perfect: in a democracy, in fact, it is rarely anything other than popular consensus. I therefore do not care what civil law says about marriage, and would not expend energy opposing any further changes to our laws.

    Any person who does not believe in God, or rejects Him, is inevitably going to regard marriage as a civil institute only - and in a sense, this is true, as determined by the participants' attitudes, just as if I were to marry, it would be primarily a religious rather than civil act because I chose that it be so.

    If I had untold power, then I could hypothetically force people to comply with the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman only. This would also be futile, because it would do absolutely nothing to solve anyone's deepest need. I believe said need to be redemption by and relationship with God; and this is something that nobody can be forced into. As John Milton suggests, 'God left free the will', and even He himself will not force anybody to come to relationship with Him if they do not want to.
    lol. what century you live in bruh. the world has changed
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by matt991610)
    This is such a great way to explain it! As a Christian i always find it hard to explain why i'm against gay marriage without being burned at the stake by everyone!
    Same
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by GraingerTown)
    I'm a Christian who sees a clear divide between moral and civil law. I believe that God created the institute of marriage, and that He intended marriage for one man and one woman. I believe that homosexual behaviour (not attraction) is wrong, as defined by God's moral law.

    What God says is right and wrong is perfect, because He is perfect. Any civil law that we create is never going to be perfect: in a democracy, in fact, it is rarely anything other than popular consensus. I therefore do not care what civil law says about marriage, and would not expend energy opposing any further changes to our laws.

    Any person who does not believe in God, or rejects Him, is inevitably going to regard marriage as a civil institute only - and in a sense, this is true, as determined by the participants' attitudes, just as if I were to marry, it would be primarily a religious rather than civil act because I chose that it be so.

    If I had untold power, then I could hypothetically force people to comply with the definition of marriage as between one man and one woman only. This would also be futile, because it would do absolutely nothing to solve anyone's deepest need. I believe said need to be redemption by and relationship with God; and this is something that nobody can be forced into. As John Milton suggests, 'God left free the will', and even He himself will not force anybody to come to relationship with Him if they do not want to.
    A sheep among the herd.

    The free will excuse seems to work well with terrorists, rapists, murderers and whatnot. Oh wait, I doesn't. Because it's impossible for someone to have free will when God already knows the results of our actions.

    The end.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    A sheep among the herd.

    The free will excuse seems to work well with terrorists, rapists, murderers and whatnot. Oh wait, it doesn't. Because it's impossible for someone to have free will when God already knows the results of our actions.

    The end.
    What do you mean by 'excuse'? Surely the only way we can be held accountable for our actions is if we have free will?

    I would certainly contend that the fact that God knows what we're going to do doesn't necessitate that He determines it - merely that He permits it. We can still be the instigators of our actions. (This, however, has drifted from the original topic.)
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.