crashfrog posted:
quote:
If there's a compelling secular reason to prevent gay sex or gay marriage, I'd love to hear it. "God sayz" is adequate to stop believers from having gay sex. But it's not enough reason to condemn gay people who just don't believe in your god.
There are secular arguments (social, ethical, and legal) against a radical redefinition of marriage. However, this appears to be a discussion that is about the pros and cons of biblical principles. Rather than reframe the discussion to make it an exchange of views on solely irreligious pros and cons, perhaps you could post a link to a discussion in which the topic is about the secular case for endorsement of homosexual behavior and/or "same gender marriage". I'm not a moderator so this is just a suggestion and is not meant to be argumentative.
Hopefully your implied question was a sincere attempt to encourage further discussion and not simply a rhetorical device meant to marginalize as irrelevant the views that oppose your opinion on marriage law. In that case, perhaps the turn in the discussion can be more explicitly inclusive. For example...
In a pluralistic society, how can the reasoning and beliefs of a religious majority be expressed in marriage law without infringing on the rights of an irreligious, or secularized, minority?
In some ways we might compare with the very opposite situation in societies, such as some in Europe, where the majority is irreligious. Or in societies where the split is close to 50-50 -- i.e. Canada. Or where there is a large homogeneous religious majority, unlike the heterogeneous majority in the USA.
In the USA, is it desirable, if possible, to make marriage law based on biblical principles while maintaining religious freedom for the individual? Is there danger that redefining marriage and sexual mores (as per some radical gay activitists) will infringe on the liberty of observant Jews, Catholics, and others? Are there relevant biblical precedents or teachings that might guide believers who accept the scriptural opposition to homosexuality?
Again, I'm not a moderator. If this could better be discussed in a new thread, please feel free to set me right.
[This message has been edited by Chairmohn, 12-31-2003]
[This message has been edited by Chairmohn, 12-31-2003]
™ Version 4.2
