c’mon and show me what you’ve done…
Currently listening to: Five Man Electrical Band - I’m a Stranger Here
Bah, I should be studying for ECE355 midterm, but I’m doing anything but. :p I setup a new mailing list Random Ramblings of Raving Roaches, fixed my spam filter, read some editorials and articles about US politics, and generally *not* studying. 
Since it’s usually pure fluff that gets posted here, I figured I’d say something of little more weight. This my view on homosexuality and gay marriage.
The bible makes it very clear that homosexuality is sin. In both old and new testament, the issue of homosexuality is clearly discussed in several places, always in negative light. However, lying is also sinful. Stealing is sinful. Heck, even thinking about coveting my neighbour’s well groomed backyard is sinful. In fact, our very existence is (or was sinful since we are descendents of Adam and Eve.
So, does being gay more sinful than lying or coveting? I don’t think so. This also means that from God’s eyes, Jack Gay and Joe Straight are one and the same. There’s only one sinless perfect being and everyone else, frankly, would be in depth of hell if it wasn’t for Christ. Both gays and straight. I fail to see this distinction that many people seems to be making between homosexuality and other sins.
As a Christian, Paul’s advice seems most suitable for me: Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God: Give non offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God. Even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. (1 Corinthians 10:31).
Now, on to the gay marriage. Problem here is the fact that marriage is both a religious / social tradition and legal tradition. On the very first book of the Bible, Eve is created from a rib taken out of Adam. Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. The institution of marriage has existed from the time first man and woman walked on this Earth. It’s from the religious and cultural aspect that I find gay marriages troubling. I don’t have problems with civil unions, partnerships, and whatever else that might be out there, but marriage, frankly, makes me uncomfortable. So partly, it’s my comfort level issue that makes me oppose gay marriage. However, there is another issue surrounding gay marriages - I’ve yet to hear or read any really valid reasons why gay couples wants to get married. If, for instance, Civil Unions have all the legal power of marriage, why do some gay couples insist on getting married? Most gay marriage websites and documentations list the arguments against gay marriage and why those arguments are stupid, but they never really make their own point either.
Here are some of the reasons that were cited for gay couples wanting to get married:
-marriage is a basic human right (It’s kinda funny… This is the exactly same type of argument that pro gay marriage articles make fun of)
-marriage has range of legal protections that we require (Then why don’t they try to pass for Vermont like Civil Union laws instead of swimming across the current to legalize gay marriages? From what I’ve seen, many people do support Civil Unions.)
I can’t help but feel that one of the unspoken reasons why gay marriage is pushed by some gay activists is because it’s probably the ultimate form of society approving gay relationships. In effect, they’re pushing this to spite the conservative right. USA is still very old fashioned, conservative country. My guess is that sooner or later, either the constitution will be amended or a federal law will be passed that’ll ban gay marriages… but it’ll be an interesting journey.
PakG1 Said,
February 13, 2004 @ 4:26 pm
Quite often, religious institutions lose their meaning because the religion itself has lost their meaning, distinctiveness, and instead becomes a social institution. I think it’s quite clear that many people in this world see marriage as having passed through that transformation, except for those who understand why they “attend church.” Reading “The Cost of Discipleship” by Dietrich Bonhoeffer” right now. It describes society’s view of Christianity quite well and how it contrasts with what it should be. Though perhaps you’ve already read it, Dan?
Author was executed in a Nazi camp. Big loss. 
Lawrence Said,
February 13, 2004 @ 4:31 pm
Had a little conversation with my phil prof today about the topic. He says that whatever “same-sex marriages” happen in the next two years will be revoked by the Supreme Court. Now THAT will be interesting to see.
When governments redefine the dictionary, that makes me very nervous. Governments didn’t invent marriage and thus they don’t have the authority, or “author’s rights” to change it. I’d rather see governments take themselves out of the whole marriage business rather than see them redefine marriage in such a way. That would be the most consistent with getting out of “the bedrooms of the nation”. But you’re right though. There’s really no reason to do this except for the reason for a social agenda.
And that’s fine and good. Ending slavery was a social agenda, so what society needs to do is to evaluate whether or not this social agenda is beneficial to the common good. I contend that it is not.
Joe Said,
February 16, 2004 @ 11:28 pm
Is this really all about semantics? Leave the word “marriage” for Christians / however anyone else wants to use it. Have the government only recognise “Civil Unions” or whatever else they want to call them, and provide with it all the legal/tax benefits currently bestowed upon civil marriages. Would that make people more comfortable?