Well that was 1967 and yes you are correct that the only inter-marrying that is forbidden in the Bible concerns other Nations (which could be construed as religions).
I didn't mean it as calling out Christianity, and you certainly don't have to apologize for someone's ignorance 40 years ago, but rather I meant it to show that a lot of people use their beliefs (whether or not they actually match up with the religion they purportedly believe in) to excuse imposing their will and morals on others. Now this doesn't matter when it matches up with virtually everyone else's morals and concerns harming others (murder, stealing), but when there is absolutely no harm to anyone then in my opinion it is unconscionable to force people to conform to others' beliefs.
OAKS wrote:but when there is absolutely no harm to anyone then in my opinion it is unconscionable to force people to conform to others' beliefs.
Not forcing the will of one onto many, or even the will of many onto many others is categorically imperative. Imagine if the roles were reversed, and say, the many told christians (i know, srtyker, i shouldn't single them out, but this is just an example) that their unions were degrading the sanctity of marriage, for some reason (perhaps because the new testament is wrong, it doesn't matter-whatever reason you want). That would not be a moral act....therefore, imposing the same rationale on homosexual marriage from a conservative standpoint, saying that homosexual unions degrade the sanctity of marriage, would also not be a moral act.
Besides this, i still love referring to my 'ol buddy Ben Franklin whenever an issue of the government's ability to take away a liberty from its citizenship arises (in this case, the liberty for any two consenting adults to be married):
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both. "
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 9:28 pm
- Location: Southern Illinois
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest