![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
More bullshit about preserving the sanctity of marriage.
I'm still waiting for that Magical RebuttalTM from the "sanctity of marriage" people. You know the one I'm talking about: It will supposedly refute the challenge made to fix divorce rates, domestic abuse, spouse-ditching, child abuse, drunken marriages that get dissolved the very next day, and spousal murder BEFORE deigning to say that gay marriage impinges on the "sanctity of marriage."
What sanctity? The sanctity I see, currently, is most certainly not exclusive to heterosexual couples. It isn't confined to divisions of sexuality; marriage sanctity is a huge and rewarding effort made by both spouses, regardless of gender. And frankly, the idea that het-couples magically get to sidestep the requirements being placed on gay marriage just because they are heterosexual is the most hypocritical argument I have heard in a long time.
So. Magical Rebuttal? Let's go, people, pronto. If you seriously believe that the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed by legally recognized gay unions, you better put your money where your mouth is and prove it to me, preferably without using religious reasoning that half the people in the world don't follow or recognize anyway. That's called subjective "proof", and it doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people. If there's a scientifically acceptable reason out there, tell it to me. Because I'm really starting to believe that you HAVE no answer to that argument.
One more thing: If your sentence ends with "it just IS that way," then don't bother wasting your time using it here. You will not like the response I give you. That kind of reasoning would never hold up in a scientific journal or in a competent court of law. We're all critical thinkers. We can be mature enough not to resort to petty tantrum throwing and foot stomping.
I'm open 24 hours.
I'm still waiting for that Magical RebuttalTM from the "sanctity of marriage" people. You know the one I'm talking about: It will supposedly refute the challenge made to fix divorce rates, domestic abuse, spouse-ditching, child abuse, drunken marriages that get dissolved the very next day, and spousal murder BEFORE deigning to say that gay marriage impinges on the "sanctity of marriage."
What sanctity? The sanctity I see, currently, is most certainly not exclusive to heterosexual couples. It isn't confined to divisions of sexuality; marriage sanctity is a huge and rewarding effort made by both spouses, regardless of gender. And frankly, the idea that het-couples magically get to sidestep the requirements being placed on gay marriage just because they are heterosexual is the most hypocritical argument I have heard in a long time.
So. Magical Rebuttal? Let's go, people, pronto. If you seriously believe that the sanctity of marriage will be destroyed by legally recognized gay unions, you better put your money where your mouth is and prove it to me, preferably without using religious reasoning that half the people in the world don't follow or recognize anyway. That's called subjective "proof", and it doesn't apply to everyone, or even most people. If there's a scientifically acceptable reason out there, tell it to me. Because I'm really starting to believe that you HAVE no answer to that argument.
One more thing: If your sentence ends with "it just IS that way," then don't bother wasting your time using it here. You will not like the response I give you. That kind of reasoning would never hold up in a scientific journal or in a competent court of law. We're all critical thinkers. We can be mature enough not to resort to petty tantrum throwing and foot stomping.
I'm open 24 hours.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-12-03 07:53 am (UTC)From:Just to put forth a slightly different perspective...
I don't think you have to black-and-white it like that, not when it comes to faith. I think any religion that doesn't allow for a little bit of questioning within its own doctrine is not really the best of situations. I am a Unitarian Universalist, and my religion, while beginning as an offshoot of Christianity, now encompasses so many other "vague spaces" in between other religions as well. We have Unitarian Buddhists, Unitarian Christians, Unitarian Jews, Unitarian Aetheists, Catholics, Pagans, Wiccans, etc, etc. You get the idea. We also have people that accept multiple beliefs from multiple religions.
What I'm saying is that a lot of people who are Unitarian in my church are there (I think) because they couldn't find the freedom to stretch out that far in their religions, to take some of it and say, yes, yes, and yes, these I believe, but this, this over here, makes me question the legitimacy of things a bit. Now, I definitely do not pretend to speak for all Unitarians; everyone has their own reasons for embracing a certain faith. But I guess I've been raised to question everything, to find the validity behind most of the things I am faced with, and so I find it a very alien idea to negate an entire doctrine just because I don't believe in some sections of it. I think it's perfectly alright to say, this makes sense to me, totally, but hey, I don't know about this other thing... It's kind of like being able to question your government. It doesn't mean you are being unfaithful or treasonous to your homeland, just that you are taking an active interest in things and how they affect you. I don't go along with everything Unitarian doctrine says. But that's my right as a Unitarian, to accept what I agree with and set aside what I don't.
I am not saying I feel you should go out and question everything, because I have no idea how that will make you feel personally in terms of your faith. Your doctrine is your doctrine, and you know better than I about what it means to question it, as I am not Christian. How you read and question or don't question the Bible is completely within your jurisdiction.
And I totally agree: I don't think God would ever be that petty, damning an entire group of people just because of which gender they choose to love. It seems so... futile.