Here's the thing...

Maybe it's because 2012 is an election year, actually that's probably exactly why.
But here we are in August and I'm getting pretty burned out with all the political rhetoric that's being thrown hither and yon.
Thank you Willow Smith for dumbing it down for us.
Especially with one thing in particular that shouldn't even be a debate...


(Deep breath)

 Ehmigawd, so many colors!
So, because I have selfish and egotistical tendencies, and also a fear of being left out, which tends to trump the previously mentioned political exhaustion...

I'd like to add my own humble little turd to this shit storm.

Is that the sound of a collective eye roll? Fair enough.
Here's a link to a gallery of adorable animals to compensate you for your time.

.....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....    

 And now I'd like to awkwardly step out on a particularly shaky limb...

I firmly feel that citizens should have the right to bear arms. Cows, pigs, and chickens are delicious. Women should have control over their own bodies. Marijuana might as well be legal and healthcare needs an overhaul.

Also, homosexuality should be devoid of stigma and marriage between two consenting adults should be legal no matter what the gender.

.....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....     .....    

What's the difference between the first and second paragraph? Well, gun rights vs. gun control, carnivore vs. vegetarian, pro-choice vs. pro-life, legalization vs. criminalization, and better healthcare vs. Obama is a socialist devil are all arguments that can and do have valid points on both sides.

No matter which side of those debates you fall on, I'm sure you can come up with a carefully crafted argument that justifies and legitimizes your position.

Maybe "carefully crafted" was being too generous.

But what is the argument against gay marriage? Gay sex is icky and God says it's a no-no?
Because, honestly, that's probably the best claim a person can make against it.

In the past, when I've heard the "homosexuality is an abomination" argument, my eyes glazed over and I simply wrote that person off as being an idiot. Which may not be entirely fair.

Living in the south especially, (not meaning to stereotype, but let's just be real here), the belief that gay marriage simply should not be, is dominate.
Looking pretty anti-equality down there.
And the most commonly touted reason to oppose rainbow wedding cake is because God has declared it to be a sin. Okay, that's your belief system. I'll bite.

But just so no one thinks I'm a total heathen, I'm not exactly unfamiliar with the Bible. In fact there's one sitting on my bookshelf right now. In-between a copy of the Koran and a book about Irish fairytales. Seriously.
See? I'm not godless!
Leviticus is particularly unfriendly toward the idea of gay marriage, and is generally the most often quoted.

Lev. 18:22, "You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination."
Lev. 20:13, "If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltness is upon them"

    Seems pretty cut and dry, huh? Well, lets see what else Leviticus has going on.

    Leviticus is seriously Old Testament. Serving as a the third of five books of the Torah, the interpretation of which is still whipping Orthodox Jews into a tizzy.
    The time period in which it was written is still up for debate, but is generally considered to have been formed during the time of Moses. Also known as that time period when the population of Israelites was quite low, (despite what Exodus may state), and they needed to do the whole "be fruitful and multiply" thing to guarantee the survival of their people, and consequently, their religion.

    There's, like, less than fifty people here!
    So, at the time, it made sense to forbid same-sex relations. They needed to increase their numbers!
    1 Cor. 6:9-10, "Or do you not know that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, shall inherit the kingdom of God."

    So you're saying anyone who has gotten frisky in the backseat, all the Hindus, cheaters, men who wear pastel shirts, same-sex couples, takers of office pens and post-its, businessmen and stock holders, partiers, people who curse at the furniture on which they stub their toe, and anyone who has hustled at pool, will all be denied entrance to the kingdom of heaven?

    Rom. 1:26-28, "For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper."

    So depraved.
    It appears as though the act of homosexuality, and by proxy, the idea of gay marriage is being condemned in both the old and new testament. Dang.

    But, 1 Corinthians and the Epistle of the Romans was written exclusively by Paul the Apostle, a man, and being a man, subject to certain prejudices. In particular, he wasn't going to let any uppity woman tell him what to do.

    1st Timothy 2:9 "In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
    10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
    11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
    12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
    13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
    14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
    15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety."

    You know what you call a woman with two black eyes?
    Told twice.
    Okay, hear that ladies? Those engagement rings, flashy shoes, and glitter eyeshadow have got to go. Have aspirations toward becoming a teacher, law enforcement officer, minister, or lawyer? Too bad so sad. Paul says no.
    She's also a theology professor...
    and is going straight to hell.
    In fact, all the passages in the New Testament condemning homosexuality are attributed to Paul.
    So, a sexist man, whose collection of letters was compiled thousands of years ago, is going to be the one thing to keep same sex marriage from becoming a reality today.

    The idea that that is even possible is astounding to me.

    And I'm not even going to get into the whole "Sodom and Gomorrah" thing, (A decent summation of which you can find here.), because this post has already gotten way too long.
    If you read it, it seems pretty obvious that an angry group of men is intent on raping a couple of angels. Rapists are terrible people regardless of sexual orientation, so the angels blinded them and then God destroyed the wicked city. The end.

    You just know Lot had to be shitting bricks.
    As thick of a book as the Bible is, those are the only arguments against homosexuality. Which can be boiled down to a desire to increase the population and one man's prejudice against "dem queers".

    Even the Ten Commandments and Proverbs 6:16, (commuted by the Catholic Church into the Seven Deadly Sins), which are generally considered to have come directly from God, and serve as the basis for both Judaism and Christianity, mention nothing about homosexuality.
    Nope, not here.

    Not here either.
    But lets not make this an anti-religion thing. I have a great deal of respect for religion, and many of their churches.
    It's not like there are any atheist groups operating homeless shelters or drug rehabilitation clinics the way the Salvation Army does.
    A good church will rally around a family in need, and several studies have shown a positive correlation between personal happiness and religion.

    It's just that, maybe taking a completely literal interpretation of the Bible isn't the way to go.

    Sure, we all have our crosses to bear. But loving someone who happens to be of the same gender shouldn't be one of them.

    To deny a person the ability to publicly declare their love and devotion for another, to tell them that they are lesser, and unfit to enjoy the same rights of their heterosexual peers is the real abomination.

    And if nothing else, consider this:

    Gay marriage = More cake

    Something we can all support!

    No comments:

    Post a Comment