6 Pro-Gay Marriage Arguments for Fightg Wh Crazy People |

Contents:

• SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?
• GAY RIGHTS
• “7 BIBLE QUOT SUPPORTG GAY RELATNSHIPS”
• AFTER YEARS OF PROGRS ON GAY RIGHTS, HOW DID THE US BEE SO ANTI-LGBTQ+?
• RPONDG TO PRO-GAY THEOLOGY, PART I: SOCIAL JTICE ARGUMENTS
• 6 PRO-GAY MARRIAGE ARGUMENTS FOR FIGHTG WH CRAZY PEOPLE
• WHY HAVE SO MANY CHRISTIANS AND CHURCH BEE PRO-GAY?

SHOULD GAY MARRIAGE BE LEGAL?

On July 25, 2014 Miami-Da County Circu Court Judge Sarah Zabel led Florida’s gay marriage ban unnstutnal and stated that the ban “serv only to hurt, to discrimate, to prive same-sex upl and their fai of equal digny, to label and treat them as send-class cizens, and to em them unworthy of participatn one of the fundamental stutns of our society.

The Amerin Psychologil Associatn, Amerin Psychiatric Associatn, and others nclud that legal gay marriage giv upl “accs to the social support that already facilat and strengthens heterosexual marriag, wh all of the psychologil and physil health benefs associated wh that support. 2016 printial ndidate and former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fra stated that civil unns are aquate as an equivalent to marriage: “Benefs are beg btowed to gay upl [ civil unns]… I believe we need to rpect those who believe that the word marriage has a spirual foundatn… Why n’t we rpect and tolerate that while at the same time sayg ernment nnot btow benefs unequally. Court papers filed July 2014 by attorneys fendg Arizona’s gay marriage ban stated that “the State regulat marriage for the primary purpose of channelg potentially procreative sexual relatnships to endurg unns for the sake of jog children to both their mother and their father… Same-sex upl n never provi a child wh both her blogil mother and her blogil father.

Lee Badgett, PhD, Director of the Center for Public Policy and Admistratn at the Universy of Massachetts at Amherst, stated that for many gay activists “marriage means adoptg heterosexual forms of fay and givg up distctively gay fay forms and perhaps even gay and lbian culture. Queer activist Anrs Zanichkowsky stated June 2013 that the then mpaign for gay marriage “tentnally and malicly eras and exclus so many queer people and cultur, particularly trans and genr non-nformg people, poor queer people, and queer people non-tradnal fai… marriage thks non-married people are viant and not tly servg of civil rights. Matt Barber, Associate Dean for Onle Programs at Liberty Universy School of Law, stated, “Every dividual engaged the homosexual liftyle, who has adopted a homosexual inty, they know, tuively, that what they’re dog is immoral, unnatural, and self-stctive, yet they thirst for that affirmatn.

GAY RIGHTS

But for such rape to have volved "all the men of the cy, both young and old" (Gen 19:4), homosexual activy mt have been monly practiced--one reason why Ju rerds that their "fornitn, and gog after strange flh are set forth [ Scripture] for an example [and warng unto ]" (Ju 7). Rponse to Argument #18: First, if the passag nmn homosexualy only bee of s associatn wh idolatry, then would logilly follow that other practic mentned the passag--ct, adultery, polygamy, btialy, and child sacrifice--are also nmned as sful only bee of their associatn wh idolatry.

“7 BIBLE QUOT SUPPORTG GAY RELATNSHIPS”

“In Romans 1:26-27 Pl do not nmn dividuals who are homosexuals by nature; rather, he refers to idolatro heterosexuals who have 'changed their nature' by mtg homosexual acts” Acrdg to this argument, the real s nmned by Pl is two-fold: (I) the changg of what is natural to a person to what is unnatural, and (ii) homosexualy mted by people who worship imag, not God. E., heterosexuals who are practicg homosexual acts), but don't apply to dividuals to whom those same actns allegedly do e naturally (so lled te homosexuals), then nsistency and tellectual tegry mand that the sful practic mentned vers 29 and 30--fornitn, backbg, ce, etc. “Pl’s arsenokoai and malakoi statements 1 Cor 6:9-10 and 1 Tim 1:9-10, nouncg the ‘effemate and them that file themselv wh mankd’ are actually a nmnatn of an ‘offensive kd of homosexualy, ’ not the ‘offense of homosexualy’” In both passag, Pl lists those who engage homosexual behavr among such lawls people as fornitors, idolaters, adulterers, thiev, dnkards, kidnapers, etc.

AFTER YEARS OF PROGRS ON GAY RIGHTS, HOW DID THE US BEE SO ANTI-LGBTQ+?

Acrdg to pro-gay advot, the Greek terms arsenokoai (translated 1 Cor 6 and 1 Tim 1 as "them that file themselv wh mankd") and malakoi (translated "effemate" or "soft" 1 Cor 6), which the apostle to nounce homosexual activy, refer to homosexual abe, not s right e.

RPONDG TO PRO-GAY THEOLOGY, PART I: SOCIAL JTICE ARGUMENTS

“Homosexualy nnot be cured; therefore the church mt wele gays and lbians to full membership and embrace their homosexual liftyle” Based on the mistaken notn that homosexualy is not a s, but a tra of one’s inty, and based on the apparent failure of prayer, unselg, human therapy, and other methods of behavr modifitn (skills of self-disciple or self-ntrol), advot of pro-gay theology argue that cure or liverance may not always be possible for those wh homosexual orientatns. In the light of our discsn the precedg pag, we nnot but borrow the followg words to rpond to attempts at domtitg homosexualy and lbianism the Seventh-day Adventist Church: The church nnot ndone homosexual activy whout betrayg s biblil, historil, and spirual herage. [2] The pro-gay arguments are bt articulated by former Yale Universy profsor of history John Boswell, Christiany, Social Tolerance and Homosexualy (Chigo: Universy of Chigo Prs, 1980), and Anglin theologian Derrick Sherw Bailey, Homosexualy and the Wtern Christian Tradn (London: Longmans, Green, 1955).

[5] “While J is not reported to have spoken on homosexualy or homosexual behavr, his one rerd statement [ Matt 19:38 and Mark 10:29] about human sexualy reveals that he unrstood mal and femal to be created by God for mutual relatns that une and fulfill both male and female a (permanent) plementary unn. E., nclive evince exists to prove that homosexualy is geic or born; and sce homosexuals are born gay, their sexual orientatn is a natural or normal tra of their inty (like the lor of the sk or hair), and the orientatn is allowed or given by God; a person's homosexual orientatn is morally ntral and unchangeable.

6 PRO-GAY MARRIAGE ARGUMENTS FOR FIGHTG WH CRAZY PEOPLE

[2] Siarly, a Uned Church of Christ mister stat this new approach to knowg (epistemology): Rather than lookg to the psychologists and the psychiatrists and the soclogists, and even to the theologians, to fd out about gay people, there is a need to listen to gay people wh our church and wh the society, to beg to unrstand what we perceive to be the problems, and then together to work on those problems. But eventually, no longer able to ny to myself who and what I really was si, I had ‘accepted’ beg homosexual, and, extreme tratn, turned my back on fay, iends, God, and everythg I had worked for, and entered to the gay life ‘rightfully’ givg God all the cred (or blame). [13] Rponse to Argument #4: While not nyg the possibily that homosexualy may be ed by many batns of variabl, cludg blogil/geic or hormonal irregulari, there are ser problems wh the argument that homosexuals are somewhat sick or abnormal, or that homosexualy is not a s, but a ndn of sfulns.

Such a perceptn, their opn, will be a reversal of the gas they ma when the Gay Right Movement succsfully lobbied to have the Amerin Psychologil Associatn and the Amerin Psychiatric Associatn remove homosexualy om the tegori of abnormal behavr and mental illns For example, one scholar expos the tellectual and psychologil nsistency this “outmod versn of natural law” which seeks to make a fe distctn between homosexual orientatn and behavr. Rpondg to the view that “while homosexualy as an orientatn is ntrary to God's created tentn, the homosexual person ought not to be adversely judged or rejected by the church, ” this rearcher unters that while some may em such a posn a more tolerant and passnate view than outright nmnatn, “ plac gay men and lbians at least two impossible bds. ), but also rais the qutn about whether or not (a) we n distguish between beg a homosexual and practicg homosexualy, whether or not the experience of nversn—the new birth—n help a person to overe his/her sful sexual orientatn (whether homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual) and whether (c) a person who is an alholic or homosexual n overe all the sful tennci and cease to be an alholic and homosexual.

WHY HAVE SO MANY CHRISTIANS AND CHURCH BEE PRO-GAY?

“There’s A Difference Between Beg A Homosexual And Practicg Homosexualy” Discsns on homosexualy often fe two ways: (a) homosexual orientatn or clatn or tenncy—an born sexual attractn, predisposn, or sire toward a member of one’s own sex, and (b) homosexual behavr or practice—an erotic activy wh a member of one’s own sex, an activy that may or may not be morally right. Rather than distguishg between beg a homosexual and practicg homosexualy, perhaps is more theologilly sound to distguish between the temptatn to act upon one’s sful homosexual tenncy (which is not wrong) and actually choosg to cherish and act upon that temptatn (a wrongful choice). Instead of referrg to homosexualy as a morally ntral orientatn, is not more biblil to say that a homosexual orientatn is nothg more than an almost helpls sful tenncy or propensy (such as kleptomania, nymphomania, veterate adultery), a ndn that mak temptatn to s almost irristible?

“God Do Not Want Homosexuals to Give Up ‘Who They Are’” Based on the assumptn that people are born gay, and on the basis of texts like Psalm 139:13 (“For you created my most parts”) and Psalm 100:3 (“It is he that hath ma and not we ourselv”), pro-gay advot mata that peopl’ homosexual orientatn/ndn is part of their inty, fg who they are as sexual human begs.