Gay Rights Immoral?

My mom asked me today why I preferred Obama to McCain and Palin, and specificaly why I don't like Palin. I told her it was because they weren't for gay rights.

"Of course Palin's not for gay rights," my mother answered promptly, "She has morals."

Wait. What?

"Morals, Mom?" I asked, needing an explaination for this one.

"Gay rights are immoral. It's right in the bible; you can't pick and choose the things you want to do with religion."

I told her that, in that case, I was not interested in this religion.

I need an explaination for this. How is being gay, bi, or anything other than straight immoral? Or is my mother as ignorant as I think?

Original Post by xblessmyeyesx:

I need an explaination for this. How is being gay, bi, or anything other than straight immoral? Or is my mother as ignorant as I think?

Your mother is as ignorant as you think.  At least, she is on this issue.  It's immoral to assign anyone more rights than someone else.  So, *not* being for gay rights is immoral.

The bible argument is, frankly, silly.  There are lots of things in the bible that were considered moral then but would get you sent to prison these days - beating women, keeping slaves, "don't rape my son but, here, have my daughter", etc.  Most modern christians understand this and do, in fact, pick and choose the things they want from the bible.

Well, if we can't pick & choose what we take seriously from the Bible, people against gay rights are SCREWED. The guys aren't allowed to shave, they're not allowed to eat shellfish, etc.

But yes, sadly people are actually against gay rights. I can't wrap my head around it, but it certainly is reality.

I am pretty sure that the biggest moral lesson from the Bible is that God is the ultimate judge and it is only for him to judge another's worthiness, character or morality. 

Any sort of hate or intolerance would be absolutely against what I believe the Bible means and says as guidance for its readers.

I never got why a loving God would care if two people of the same gender love each other. Honestly, what's the big deal? Who are they hurting?

Of course, maybe that's why I didn't remain a Christian.

Did she tell you about the story of Sodom and Gomorrah? haha..

I agree with everything you all said except for being ignorant.

My own mother doesn't support gay rights no matter how much we talk about it but she is not ignorant.  Even though I can point out this and that she still disagrees with me, but it's not because she is ignorant, it is just how she thinks.

Gay marriage isn't hurting anyone - it's up to the people involved to decide if that's their choice to get married - just because I'm Catholic and wouldn't marry if I was gay doesn't mean that everyone else is held to my beliefs.  My very best friend is a lesbian and I support her in everything she does.

But seriously, does gay marriage hurt you?  No.  One of the main arguments against it is that marriage is to protect children - but what about couples who have no children?  That doesn't make their marriage invalid.

http://www.stopgeek.com/top-10-reasons-gay-ma rriage-should-be-illegal.html

Check out the above website if you want some good (and amusing) arguments about gay marriage.

However, on a slightly unrelated tangent, support for gay marriage does bring up other issues that I happen to be strongly opposed to.  My lesbian friend asked me the other day why incest was wrong.  I was perterbed to find that I couldn't give her a good reason, other than that their children would be mentally handicapped and that it just WAS.  Therefore, I have to believe that once you allow one thing, you must allow all, or there is no justice.  I don't think incestuous marriage should be allowed, even if children are out of the issue, but then again, I have no good reason for this other than that it's against my morals.  Call me ignorant, but... it's an interesting thought.

Ha! So by your logic, kizzi, my 85 year old grandfather - whom I have heard make several racist comments over the years - is not ignorant? Is it "just how he thinks?"

Seriously, think about what you said. "My mother doesnt support gay rights." So she believes some humans who were born a certain way dont deserve as many rights as other humans born a different way. I cant see how that statement isnt ignorant. And if she thinks being gay is a choice Id say shes never met a gay person.

The slippery slope argument, ie 'if you let them marry you have to let anyone marry' is totally flawed. We dont allow incest because its bad for humanity. Two closely related people who mix their genes together tend to produce unhealthy babies. Deleterious genes get overexpressed in the next generation because both parents had the mutation. People probably realized this way back in the caveman days and its been passed along as a "moral value" ever since. Gay marriage isnt going to lead to legalizing polygamy, underage marriage, pedophilia or whatever else because those situations involve people potentially hurting/abusing people. Obviously the law is going to remain on the side of preventing abuse.

Furthermore, you argue against your own point by saying "Therefore, I have to believe that once you allow one thing, you must allow all, or there is no justice." Exactly. This is an issue because there is currently no justice. Example: my gay uncles have been happily living together for over 20 years. Meanwhile, you could go get drunk, meet some random dude in Las Vegas, go get married by Elvis for $20 and your "marriage" to a stranger would be worth more in the eyes of the law than the 20 years my uncles have spent together. It pisses me off.

As for the 'who cares because no one's getting hurt' argument, its a daily slap in the face to millions of Americans that their relationship isnt "worthy" of official recognition. It didnt "hurt" black people to drink out of separate drinking fountains. But it was wrong. So we changed it.

I think 'ignorant' is the wrong term.  Ignorant implies a lack of knowledge.  What we have here is a difference in beliefs.  We have the church people who do not simply believe gay marriage is wrong, but being gay is a sin.  If being gay is a sin, than allowing gay marriage is giving a stamp of legal approval on a sin.  It is quite reasonable to be against such a thing if you believe homosexuality is wrong.

On the other hand, if being gay is not morally wrong, then there isn't much of an argument against gay marriage.  This is what will make a discussion with your mother about the subject difficult.  Gay marriage is like abortion.  It is a difference of opinion about what is right and wrong.  These are not subjects that are based on information or a lack of it, but on deeply held moral convictions.

Right clharr, but the whole "being gay is a sin" thing is based on the idea that people choose to be gay.

People do not choose to be gay.  That is not an opinion.  So the basis of the argument stems from ignorance.

Ignorant: lacking knowledge, rude through lack of knowledge of good manners!

Freedom of speech! we all have rights, and your mum has the right to feel the way she does, her thoughts aren't harming anyone.

It makes me laugh that people shout all the time about this right, that right, yet when someone quietly disagrees their right to do so is shot down in flames.

Smacks of Double standards.

The case b/c it hurts the children is ridiculous.  There are way too many unwanted and abused kids in the world to argue it -not to mention that having two loving parents is always better than one. I could care less if a kid comes to school with two moms - this is preferable to one mom and a dad they do not know.

Secondly, I don't understand how anyone votes for a single issue.  My parents vote republican soley for prolife.  Gah.  There are so many other things to consider, like, I don't know, the economy and who can best help us.  Healthcare, education, the war.  I don't understand the single mindedness. 

Somone recently posted an oldie but a goodie that addresses the whole 'It's in the bible' argument.  I think you should pass this along to your mom:

http://caloriecount.about.com/letter-dr-laura -ft118361

Morals tend to be subjective according to tradition and timing...  morality changes continuously.   In some cultures it's morally acceptable to murder your daughter because she wants to marry the wrong man, for example.  In the USA  until relatively recently it was morally & legally acceptable to discriminate against black people.... now that is accepted as morally unacceptable and reinforced with legislation.

So your mother and others like her are simply expressing the morals of her particular culture in another time.   It's what she was taught growing up, presumably, alongside 'thou shalt not kill' and all the rest.  But society has now decided to leave that particular morality behind and move on to a new one and this leaves people like your mother looking like dinosaurs.   As long as her beliefs don't mean she falls foul of the law, she's entitled to retain them.   Free speech is another moral issue, surely?   My own mother (70) was brought up with a similar set of religious-based beliefs and whilst she would never be openly anti-gay, I know that she's uncomfortable with the concept.  After all, for the first 30 years of her life it was not only morally wrong but illegal in the UK to be openly homosexual.  I don't think it's a question of ignorance.

Everything changes..... be prepared to find out in 20 or 40 years time that some of the things you strongly believe to be morally acceptable or unacceptable now, become quite the reverse in time.   And then you have to aks yourself whether you stick to your original beliefs or you move with the times.....

Original Post by azirra:

Ha! So by your logic, kizzi, my 85 year old grandfather - whom I have heard make several racist comments over the years - is not ignorant? Is it "just how he thinks?"

Seriously, think about what you said. "My mother doesnt support gay rights." So she believes some humans who were born a certain way dont deserve as many rights as other humans born a different way. I cant see how that statement isnt ignorant. And if she thinks being gay is a choice Id say shes never met a gay person.

The slippery slope argument, ie 'if you let them marry you have to let anyone marry' is totally flawed. We dont allow incest because its bad for humanity. Two closely related people who mix their genes together tend to produce unhealthy babies. Deleterious genes get overexpressed in the next generation because both parents had the mutation. People probably realized this way back in the caveman days and its been passed along as a "moral value" ever since. Gay marriage isnt going to lead to legalizing polygamy, underage marriage, pedophilia or whatever else because those situations involve people potentially hurting/abusing people. Obviously the law is going to remain on the side of preventing abuse.

Furthermore, you argue against your own point by saying "Therefore, I have to believe that once you allow one thing, you must allow all, or there is no justice." Exactly. This is an issue because there is currently no justice. Example: my gay uncles have been happily living together for over 20 years. Meanwhile, you could go get drunk, meet some random dude in Las Vegas, go get married by Elvis for $20 and your "marriage" to a stranger would be worth more in the eyes of the law than the 20 years my uncles have spent together. It pisses me off.

As for the 'who cares because no one's getting hurt' argument, its a daily slap in the face to millions of Americans that their relationship isnt "worthy" of official recognition. It didnt "hurt" black people to drink out of separate drinking fountains. But it was wrong. So we changed it.

 

No, he's NOT ignorant.  Your 85-year-old grandfather was raised in a different world.  It was not the world we live in today where much more is tolerated.  He is not ignorant; he is OLD.  We will never change his mind, just as we will never change the mind of my friend's grandma, who sees nothing wrong with pointing out quite audibly in public that she saw "black people" at the mall when she was shopping.

Don't call my mother ignorant.  She most certainly is not.  She is a very intelligent woman with a strong set of MORAL values.  Because in her religion, moral values include aversion to gay rights, she believes this.  It is not a lack of knowledge or understanding.  She has her own opinion and she is entitled to it, and it's not because she is ignorant.  It's ignorant of YOU to say that she is, simply because her opinion disagrees with yours.

And your own argument against incest makes no sense.  I pointed out that where children are not involved, there should theoretically be no issue (ie. gay men or women, using, gosh, birth control, maybe?).  This does not hurt anybody.  I did not argue against my own point - I pointed out that because another type of marriage would become acceptable, it could open the doors to other possibilities.  This could be another point of view that anti-GLBT rights people may share.  Pedophilia is a stupid argument because obviously children aren't consenting adults with a full-reasoning mind and the power to make educated choices on such a mature level.  And polygamy DOES make sense, because theoretically, if all involved were happy with the situation, then there is no one it is hurting.  Not saying I personally support incest/polygamy, but I'm saying the reasoning against them is relatively the same behind the reasoning against gay marriage.

And you misinterpreted when I said, "who cares because no one's getting hurt."  I meant it in the sense that no one should care if gay people DO get married because nobody is getting hurt.  As in, why is it any of their business what gays do.  Get it now?  I don't feel like I should have to explain this because I feel that my post was CLEARLY pro-gay, but obviously you missed the point.

So this should be clear, now, pardon you for jumping down my throat for agreeing with you about gay rights.

Original Post by kizzichan:

One of the main arguments against it is that marriage is to protect children - but what about couples who have no children?  That doesn't make their marriage invalid.

 I've also heard the argument that marriage is to procreate, and therefore if you can't have children, marriage shouldn't be an option.

 The irony was that this was told to me by a woman in her second marriage - she had kids from her first marriage, but now in her second, they were too old (and still had 3 grown kids to pay for) to have a baby. 

 So, to be clear... she was in a marriage that would never result in children. In fact, they had taken measures to prevent children. So by her own logic, her marriage shouldn't exist.

 It isn't ignorance... it's believing that your beliefs should dictate other people's lives. Which is egotistical, but not necessarily ignorant.

.... And I still say that Britney Speares has done more to harm the institution of marriage than any gay couple.

Homosexuality is a naturally-occuring biological function and has nothing to do with morality.

Wallstreet....on the other hand....

Original Post by kizzichan:

...My lesbian friend asked me the other day why incest was wrong.  I was perterbed to find that I couldn't give her a good reason, other than that their children would be mentally handicapped and that it just WAS...

Incest is socially unacceptable for a reason. This stems from thousands upon thousands of years of your genetic predisposition not to have children with your close relatives. Not all of incestual children are going to be mentally handicapped or have something wrong with them, they are just more likely to have an underlying genetic disorder pop up when their parents are closely related. I actually don't have a problem with incestual relationships if the two people involved are A) consenting adults and B) aren't planning on having children on their own (adoption would be fine).
I do not believe that legalizing gay marriage will start a trend in legalizing all sorts of different marriage types though, at least not for a while.

Here's the thing though, I don't have a problem with polygamist relationships either. As long as everyone involved is happy and are not forcibly kept in these kinds of relationships (there are many women who literally can't get out), there shouldn't be an issue.

I'm very pro gay rights. This country can not talk about equality within it's borders when there are people who are denied the right to marriage. In regards to marriage being a religious rite, if I can get married by elvis without having God ever mentioned... hasn't this particular marriage had nothing to do with the church? It's still just as valid as a marriage within the church, so why do people consistently get their panties in a bunch about gay people marrying outside the church?

If people can get married for the tax breaks and health insurance, then gay people should be able to get married for love.

You'll be hard pressed to find immorality in homosexuality if step away from religion.

"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" LOL
Adam and Eve are proof its immoral to wear clothes and live in houses.

If there's a god, assuming he'll forgive the haters who took written text over the obvious to love and accept those who love and care for each other.

Original Post by rebepi:

Original Post by kizzichan:

...My lesbian friend asked me the other day why incest was wrong.  I was perterbed to find that I couldn't give her a good reason, other than that their children would be mentally handicapped and that it just WAS...

Incest is socially unacceptable for a reason. This stems from thousands upon thousands of years of your genetic predisposition not to have children with your close relatives. Not all of incestual children are going to be mentally handicapped or have something wrong with them, they are just more likely to have an underlying genetic disorder pop up when their parents are closely related. I actually don't have a problem with incestual relationships if the two people involved are A) consenting adults and B) aren't planning on having children on their own (adoption would be fine).
I do not believe that legalizing gay marriage will start a trend in legalizing all sorts of different marriage types though, at least not for a while.

Here's the thing though, I don't have a problem with polygamist relationships either. As long as everyone involved is happy and are not forcibly kept in these kinds of relationships (there are many women who literally can't get out), there shouldn't be an issue.

I'm very pro gay rights. This country can not talk about equality within it's borders when there are people who are denied the right to marriage. In regards to marriage being a religious rite, if I can get married by elvis without having God ever mentioned... hasn't this particular marriage had nothing to do with the church? It's still just as valid as a marriage within the church, so why do people consistently get their panties in a bunch about gay people marrying outside the church?

If people can get married for the tax breaks and health insurance, then gay people should be able to get married for love.

I agree completely.  As for incestuous relationships, I know why they're socially unacceptable, it is just that I am always annoyed when presented with such a SIMPLE question to not be able to give one good answer.  I mean, I don't support it - I'm not going to tell someone not to do it, but I don't support it like I do gay rights.  That's probably judgmental of me, and there probably isn't any huge difference between the two (consentual adult relationship where both individuals are in love), but I don't.  Just how I feel.  I realize that's contradictory, but at least I recognize that it is.  As for polygamy, I agree.  There is really no good reason against it.  Now, let it not be said that I would like for the country to become a typically incestuous, polygamist or gay nation, but I can't condemn it.  I can choose not to support such things (although I do, through circumstances in my life, support gay marriage), but I can't condemn them.  I won't judge anyone for their choices, whether I believe in them or not, because I haven't lived their life.  A lot of people would do well to adopt the "don't judge" mentality - it does marvellous things as far as getting along in the world.

Everything changes..... be prepared to find out in 20 or 40 years time that some of the things you strongly believe to be morally acceptable or unacceptable now, become quite the reverse in time.   And then you have to aks yourself whether you stick to your original beliefs or you move with the times.....

#13, gi jane. -  I like your reasoning.  It makes sense.