What's the big deal with gay marriage?

Almost all arguments against gay marriage are illogical or based on logical fallacies in my opinion.

One I see often is people refusing to change the traditional definition of marriage. They don't give a reason why they don't want to change it, maybe they have a really bad phobia of change or something.

Other people use religious arguments (thankfully we don't live in a theocracy, right? Bit arrogant to simply disregard other people's beliefs, or lack of beliefs, just because they differ from your own opinion).

Of course, too, there's plenty of emotional arguments ("It'll ruin marriage for straights!!11!11one1!!!!")

And let's not forget wide-spread homophobia... even though marriage will not prevent nor encourage homosexual relationships and sex. But hey, you'd think that in the 21st Century, we as a society would have matured enough to be more tolerant. Guess not.

Oh yeah, and have you noticed how arguments against gay marriage are almost invariably selfish, when the arguer probably won't even be affected by gays receiving equal rights? (In this case, the right to marry someone you're attracted to AND have the relationship legally recognised).

EDIT: fredfox1 - if you don't want to change the definition of marriage because it has become something "great and amazing", it sounds pretty selfish to not allow gays to experience something so great too, right? I mean, sure, you could say that it is "selfish" for people to want equal rights. All humans are selfish. But if this selfishness isn't harming people, in fact on the contrary it's making people happy and allowing them one of the greatest gifts of freedom and equality, what's the big deal? You've got to make a distinction between 'harmful' selfishness, and 'productive' selfishness.

Also, the argument that gay marriage will open the gates to beastiality or incest or what have you, that is a purely emotional argument. How do you know it will? Your argument has no solid foundation what-so-ever.

As for gays continuing to be discriminated against by the general population, that is again another issue. Gay marriage is more than attempting to increase tolerance towards gays (though hopefully that would be one beneficial side effect), gay marriage is about equal rights.

EDIT #2: For those who want to argue that marriage is a religious thing, or a religious ritual. Here is a compromise. Given that a marriage is legally-binding, how about we change the term from 'marriage' to 'civil partnership' for both gays and straights, therefore eliminating any religious connotations. Then we let the churches deal with marriages, but church marriages will not be legally-binding alone (the whole keeping church and state separate thing). Sounds like a good compromise to me - churches get to keep their traditional ways, while gays can have their civil partnerships (including legal rights and responsibilities which come along with civil partnerships) recognised without getting any churches upset that their traditions are been torn apart by gay-rights activists.

What business is it of government to let people advertise that they love each other? How about taking an advert in a newspaper instead?

Listen, the government has laws that provide special benefits for marriages. It's not just the government passing out a piece of paper. In many cases, this means real money. My tax money. It's an issue because it's public money.

We should either keep marriage as it is or we eliminate marriage from the law altogether.

The problem is that marriage as it is defined by those who created it (religious) is a mutual bond between a man and a women so as to complete one another in a passionate companionship. It has survived the test of time as something special and amazing as it has become one of the largest and most common institutions around the world. The problem is that "two dudes or two chicks" couples want to change that definition to suit their own wants. And that want isn't for civil, legal, financial gains that are bestowed to married couples because civil unions and domestic partnerships offer every state benefit there is all across the country. Instead, in a ditch effort to be accepted by society, they believe that having the same title will grant them equality. Unfortunately that will not be the case, they will still be looked down upon and discriminated against. The only effect will be devaluation and desecration of one of America's largest and deepest placed institutions. They scream equality, and so what about two brothers screaming equality, should we accept their sexuality too? After that people will marry their dog or their car and completely diminish all sacredness that made marriage mean anything. I believe that the line is drawn where marriage is today. Civil Unions and Domestic Partnerships along with living together, even a "wedding" for yourselves should be sufficient for the two of you to live happy lives and not destroy what I believe to be a very precious commitment.

In this politically correct climate that relinquishes morality to the relativistic whims of society, stating that homosexuals should not marry is becoming unpopular. Should a woman be allowed to marry another woman? Should a man be allowed to marry another man? Should they be given legal protection and special rights to practice their homosexuality? No, they should not.

The Bible, of course, condemns homosexuality. It takes no leap of logic to discern that homosexual marriage is also condemned. But our society does not rely on the Bible for its moral truth. Instead, it relies on humanistic and relativistic morals upon which it builds its ethical structure.

Homosexuality is not natural. Just look at the male and female bodies. They are obviously designed to couple. The natural design is apparent. It is not natural to couple male with male and female with female. It would be like trying to fit two screws together or two nuts together and then say, "See, its natural for them to go together."

Homosexuals argue that homosexuality is natural since it occurs in the animal world. But this is problematic. It is true that this behavior occurs in the animal kingdom. But, it is also true that we see animals eating their prey alive and even their own young. We see savagery, cruelty, and extreme brutality. Yet, we do not condone such behavior in our own society. Proponents of the natural order argument should not pick-and-choose the situations that best fit their agendas. They should be consistent and not compare us to animals. We are not animals. We are made in God's image.

Where will it end?

Political protection of a sexual practice is ridiculous. I do not believe it is proper to pass laws stating that homosexuals have 'rights' to have sex with one another and then redefine marriage to include their views. If they can do that, then where will it end? What about pedophilia or bestiality? These are also sexual practices. Should they, too, be protected by law? If homosexuality is protected legally, why not those as well?

What should be the Christian's Response to the Homosexual?

Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin and like any other sin, it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross and repented of.

Christians should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same they would any other person in sin. They should treat homosexuals with the same dignity as they would anyone else because, like or not, they are made in the image of God. However, this does not mean that Christians should approve of their sin. Not at all. Christians should not compromise their witness for a politically correct opinion that is shaped by guilt and fear.

In fact the following verses should be kept in mind when dealing with homosexuals.

"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. 6 Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person," (Col. 4:5-6).

"But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith," (1 Tim. 1:5).

You do not win people to the Lord by condemning them and calling them names. This is why God says to speak with wisdom, grace, and love. Let the love of Christ flow through you so that the homosexuals can see true love and turn to Christ instead of away from Him.

It's not a big deal to people who aren't seeking to get married.

For those of us whose states don't recognize our marriage, being denied equal rights is kind of a big deal.

Of course, in my state, Insurance Companies, etc. are terrified to not recognize domestic partnerships...they'll lose state business.

Exactly. But people have a really hard time understanding and acceptng that fact. I guess they think if they oppose it long enough, everyone will just give up trying to be "different" and everyone will go back to the days of strict heterosexuality. Lol.

Keeping same-sex relations sinful increases its popularity. What did Adam and Eve do when God said don't eat the forbidden fruit?

Gay marriage is a sin according to the Bible.

Just because it doesn't hurt anyone doesn't mean it is okay. Gay marriage is a sexual sin just as fornication, sex before marriage. These sins are against God's plan of one man and one women having sex within the marriage covenent. God still loves a gay person, just as he still loves a fornicator. It hurts Him to see what they are doing beacuse they are going against His will and in the long run making things harder on themselves.

Please contact me if you have any questions as I would be happy to help you find the right answers. Have a nice day everyone.

"It's a sin" another answerer wrote...

OK, next time you tell a lie, or masturbate, or have "lust in your heart," or judge somebody, we're going to take away your civil rights. Hey, those are sins too...?

Their objection to it isn't about their religion...it's about their bigotry. They just use their religion as a cover.

Peace.

Because it goes against the rules of a book written over 2,000 years ago.