Same-sex Marriage Again

It’s no surprise that same-sex marriage within the Christian faith has caused a lot of debate and discussion. Ultimately if you are gay, and Christian, and don’t wish to be a ‘practicing homosexual’, more power to you. I have no issue with that. Likewise, I have no issue with Muslims (and anyone of any religion) who adopts a similar viewpoint. The problem comes from when the religious right decides it needs to suppress or strip rights from the LBGT community, and then cries foul if their bigotry is exposed.

Case in point, my latest discussion on Blogging Theology has once again highlighted a worrying trend to compare to homosexuality with other, unrelated forms of behaviour. Firstly, a user called ‘Believer’ had this to say, in response to an article talking about a same-sex Muslim marriage:

And of course the secularists who have the audacity to call themselves progressive will promote this FILTH.

Harsh language already. I asked them…

‘Filth’? Is that what you think of homosexuals?

Yes and that’s what the whole planet thought just decades ago! The only reason we see this stuff happen is because of the secular world pushing this BS and calling it progressive. Sickening! If this was done for incest would you be ok with it? You people always make a problem out of Prophet Muhammad (saw) marrying Aisha at a young age (even though NO ONE did before the 20th century!) but you think this is all fine and dandy. Everything is upside down!

Hmm. I am not at all sure the whole planet thought homosexuals were filth. The world was (and in some parts still is) a dangerous place for homosexuals, bisexuals, transgenders, and many other types of people. What we are seeing is a gradual understanding that so many stereotypes were wrong, and people are slowly waking up to the concept of greater civil rights. The push-back against this from conservative religious elements is frightening in its language and actions. The stuff about Muhammad and Aisha I am not going to discuss here – that is a different matter altogether, though if you check out the thread you’ll see a raging argument about it.

I think, to put it quite bluntly, you are a bigot hiding behind your faith. The difference between homosexuals and hetrosexuals is minor – the preference for whom they prefer to be in relationships with – yet this has been enough for homosexuals to endure persecution throughout history, often in the name of God. You play the false equivalence game by comparing homosexuality with incest – the two are *not* the same, yet all too often (and quite often on this site too it would seem), we get to see the Slippery Slope Fallacy indulged in, as you are doing.

My reply was, as you can see, quite blunt. I think Believer is a Muslim (judging from some of his other posts), but one thing that became apparent is that on some things, Muslims and Christians agree, quite passionately. The next poster is someone who guys by the moniker ‘defendchrist’.

Hi Darthtimon
What do you mean the difference Homosexuals and Heterosexuals is minor?

Here are a people who in the 60’s and 70’s claiming they don’t want to be like Hetrosexuals that they were different etc etc.

Have you read their manifesto and their plan and desire to sodomize and destroy the family?

They are not only ones in history who have had to endure persecution as they act like on every street corner someone is trying to attack them please.

They want to change the meaning of words….

to not agree with = hate

to have a different opinion = bigoted

reproductive system and digestive organs dont go together.

All the Homosexuals can have their opinion and no one else can that seems a bit intolerant to me dont you think, and I think you even called believer a bigot.

You are obviously not tolerant of him!

The point I’m making is there are things that are sinful and disgusting to some people, that are not to others and everyone is entitled to their opinion regardless.

Oddly enough, he never did provide that ‘homosexual manifesto’. The dismissal of the persecution homosexuals have faced throughout history, just because other groups have faced persecution too, is reminiscent of arguments like ‘well, black people shouldn’t moan about slavery, because other groups were enslaved too!’ One group’s suffering does not diminish another group’s suffering! It doesn’t become somehow more tolerable because it’s happened to other people!

I am entitled to call Believer a bigot. I asked him if he thought homosexuals were filth, as per his statement. He said yes. He wasn’t referring to the act, he was referring to the people who happen to be homosexual. That is pretty blatent.

And yes, the difference is minor. I can’t believe you refer to a ‘homosexual manifesto’. Have you ever seen such a document? Homosexuals, like any other group, are made up of a wide range of people with different interests and opinions. You would object to Muslims being identified as a homogenus group, a monolithic entity, would you not? After all, that is a tactic historically used to demonise all Muslims. It is also what Believer is doing to homosexuals.

Yes, other groups throughout history have been persecuted. This doesn’t lessen the impact or make it more reasonable somehow. They continue to face persecution today – in some parts of the world homosexuality is punishable by imprisonment, in others death. In still others we get denial of rights. Is that reasonable to you?

Hi Darthtimon
Yes I have read their manifesto and a lot of nonsense within it. They have an agenda and its a selfish one because this is all about sexual anarchy.

When you look at some if not most of the sexual orientations are you going to honestly say that they all normal behaviour by human beings?

For instance Coprophilia = sexual arousal associated with feces…normal yeah?

what about Necrophilia = sexual arousal or activity with a corpse

or what about Urophilia = sexual arousal associated with urine.

and last but not least Zoophilia = engaging in sexual activity with animals.

Lets look at the nasty germs that certain individuals catch and spread among themselves.

Anal cancer, Chlamydia, Trachomatis, Cryptosporidium, Giardia lamblia, HIV,Herpes,HPV, Syphilis and last but not least Gonorrhea which defeating the doctors so called remedies.

Have look at what is called “Gay bowel syndrome” research what that is all about.

Someone has kicked the door open in society that now anything goes and no one must have an opinion.

This isn’t just a set of false equivalence arguments (the comparions between homosexual sexual activities and necrophilia, zoophilia are in particular where the Slippery Slope Fallacy is proudly displayed), it’s an atttempt to make anything that fits outside of defendchrist’s particular ideas about sex seem abnormal. There are things on his list that don’t appeal to me, and yes, some of those things carry risks, but listing them out alongside anal and oral sex (which hetrosexual couples can also partake in) is an attempt to impose a very specific standard, and whilst defendchrist doesn’t come out and say that directly, that’s the implication of his words.

If there really is a ‘homosexual manifesto’ I guess you’ll have no trouble providing a link to it?

You just rattled off a list of things that bear no relation to the idea of consenting adults wanting to get married or be in a relationship with each other. I can see that you are focusing exclusively on the physical act. Well, heterosexual couples might choose to engage in anal sex, oral sex, use toys etc. Are we to frown upon that behaviour in heterosexual couples or is this exclusively about hating the act if performed by homosexual couples?

The diseases you listed are not exclusive to same- sex couples either. There is a general ignorance of contraception and means to prevent STDs which applies as much to heterosexual couples as it does homosexual couples. Better sex education (as opposed to shaming homosexuals by calling them filth) might be the better option.

I don’t seem to recall saying no one can have an opinion. The problem is the conservative religious right wanting to impose its will on everyone, including non-believers. ‘You can’t get married, even though it doesn’t affect me!’ ‘My faith trumps your civil rights!’ Did you know that in Uganda (a Christianity-based country) you can be locked up for life for being homosexual? In Iran, interpretations of Sharia Law mean the death penalty can come into play. You speak of the right to voice an opinion – how about the right to live in peace without oppression and discrimination and even the threat of death?

You obviously didnt get the point.

The manifesto go look for it and it will help you understand the mindset of these people.

cures for STD’s I dont know where you have been living but a lot of them are responding to what the doctors are using to fight them in fact they are becoming resistant.

two or more of the “sexual orientations” I listed are not orientations they are do with perversion.

How can we live in peace when homosexuals are attacking every area of life to suit them.

if you dont bake them a cake they want to get your business shut down utter nonsense

they seriously insecure and intolerant of everyone else that does not agree with them.

poo and urine are not a part normal sexual activity and guess who involves themselves in that?

Uganda and life imprisonment for Homosexuals…thats the law.

You can recieve the death penalty for tax evasion in China whats your point.

murderers bank robbers rapist are locked up for what they do, should they now turn around say they were born like that.

Sorry certain parts of the body are not made for sex just check out the medical facts.

And furthermore whoever said everything that hetrosexuals is ok they can do nasty too.

At this point, defendchrist starts to rattle off standard homophobic mantra.

I got your point. It’s misleading and inaccurate and about what I expected.

The burden of proof is on you to provide the details of this so-called ‘homosexual manifesto’.

I didn’t talk of cures for STDs. I talked of preventative measures. They are different things, and education on things like safe-sex, not the creation of stigmas, is the best way forward.

Your efforts to link sexual orientation with certain acts is duly noted.

Your equation of homosexuals ‘attacking’ businesses is nothing at all like the genuine problems facing same-sex couples. You think it’s fair to lock someone up for their sexual orientation, or even kill them? You then go on to make *another* false comparison – this time between homosexuals and MURDERERS and RAPISTS – seriously?!

Public businesses have made a commitment to uphold public laws on equality and discrimination. Shall we open the door to arbitrary discrimination, on whatever grounds one can think of? ‘I refuse to serve Muslims/Christians on religious grounds’. ‘I refuse to serve black people on social grounds’. ‘I refuse to serve people who wear glasses on cultural grounds’. You cannot talk of insecurity and intolerance when you want to take rights away, or deny them in the first instance.

These people who lived by their bible refused to serve a certain type of customer whether it is a bakery or a hotel owner.

Homosexuals have tried to put themselves in the same position as black people.

Black people cannot change blackness

Homosexuality is a learned behaviour no genetic proof.

so do you believe that anal sex is normal?

that is region all waste comes out and inpurities and bacteria

See what I mean about anal sex? Again, not something I would personally want to do, but a lot of couples – hetrosexual ones – engage in it. Does it cause anyone outside their relationship any harm? Of course not. Plus, homosexuality exists in nature – it is hardly a learned behaviour.

Their business is a public one, not a Biblical one. Their personal beliefs should not influence who they serve. They should not be starting up public-facing businesses only to then cherrypick which customers they deal with. Also, what proof do you have that homosexuality is a learned behaviour? Is it learned from their hetrosexual parents? Is it a conscious choice to risk being ejected from one’s family, to risk being unable to get a job, or even jailed and killed?

If a couple wants to perform anal sex that’s up to them, regardless of their orientation. Why the obsession over what goes on in someone else’s bedroom?

At this point, defendchrist went quiet for a bit. What followed was a string of insults between him and a few other posters over some of the finer points of Islam and Christianity. Next up, Believer piped up, back-tracking a little from his earlier position of calling homosexuals ‘filth’.

I don’t care about people being homosexuals! I just care about the act! What on earth does it matter if people are gay as long as they don’t act on it. I will never treat them differently then non-gays.

Not what he said before. The first respondent was defendchrist:

thats like saying I’m a murderer but as long as you dont murder I’m cool with you.

Another one of those false equivalence moments. One act is clearly a crime, the other is not.

Why are you equating homosexuality with murder?

His reply wasn’t particularly inspired:

its an example I could use something else if murder bothers

I think it’s quite revealing that you equate consenting adults with the act of murder.

Next defendchrist went off on a mini-rant:

thats exactly my point about the way people today. no one can have an opinion outside of the bigoted homosexual point of view.

These are the people that equate not agreeing with…as hatred…hate speech et etc.

When did to not agree with someone = hate?

And here you are making the same mistake about what I said.

its like saying its ok to be rapist as long as you raping anyone…better still do it the privacy of your own home.

The point I’m making is that its not ok for everyone to be able to what they want.

can robbers rapist murderers and fraudsters do what they want in the privacy of their own home?

You see life is not just about homosexuals and what they want.

There is a big world homos act they are only ones that bad treatment…get a life

Equating homosexuality with murder isn’t simply having a point of view, it’s a deliberate, distorted approach, aimed at demonising homosexuals. That truly IS bigoted, and what’s worse, you seek to DEFEND such an approach.

No one says you have to agree with or approve of homosexuals, but whether you do or not, they exist, they are not going anywhere, and they shouldn’t have to hide in the shadows, much less be denied rights, just because you don’t like them.

You then repeat your stance by comparing rape to homosexuality – which just goes to show how meaningless your apparent ‘point’ is. Murder and rape are by any definition non-consensual acts, ones of great violence and horror. Not remotely the same as a consensual act between two adults. Do you understand the difference?

tell the whole truth did I not include robbers and fraudsters?

We have homosexual people who want everyone to tolerate them but they dont tolerate others who dont agree with them.

So there are no such thing as homosexual bigots?

Do you think it a good thing to compare homosexuality with not only rape and murder but also robbery and fraud? I’m not sure why you think that makes your argument better…

Do you know why there are some homosexuals (and to quote you, don’t tar with the same brush) who might act in what you would consider a bigoted way against others? It might because those ‘others’ are suggesting that what two consenting adults do is somehow comparable to the actions of serial killers like Fred West. It might be the suggestion that they shouldn’t expect equality, or that they shouldn’t want tolerance, that they should be happy to be called ‘filfth’.

Maybe it’s the notion that they should shrug off the oppression and violence directed at them, because ‘other groups have faced the same’ (as if that somehow makes it right).

You clearly do not understand why your comparisons are blatantly flawed.

At this point our old friend Paul chipped in:

sin is sin, what is prohibited is prohibited. That is all.

Do you believe homosexuality is the same as murder?

of course not. Murder is murder. Homosexulity is homosexuality.

A completely meaningless answer.

And one is an act of violation, whilst the other is a consensual act, correct?

Here we have defendchrist again:

by the way who said anything about denying rights, dont tar everyone with the same set.

Furthermore Fred West and his wife were doing things in the privacy of their own home too.

I think you cant tell the difference between talking about a way of life and attacking it

I think there’s a lot defendchrist doesn’t understand – he actually compared the consensual actions of a pair of adults to the actions of serial killers. Yes, seriously.

See, here’s the thing. Don’t like anal sex? Then don’t do it. Don’t like gay marriage? Don’t marry someone of the same sex. Don’t want to serve same-sex couples in shops? Don’t work in a customer-facing environment. It really is that simple folks.


One thought on “Same-sex Marriage Again

  1. You have to look at it from a quasi-medical angle. His entire ability to make judgements is compromised because he doesn’t have clear ethical parameters. Instead he believes in an arbitrary system of aristocracy, where hierarchy determines what is “right”. That means no amount of evidence you present matters to him. Only an authority within his group structure has the power to change the rules he observes.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s