Gay marriage and behavior: bad, just weird and unnatural, neither, or both?

This topic has been argued back and forth, so I will try my best to stay cool and use plain reason to sort things out. First off a definition…

Gay: One who chooses to live their lifestyle of having love and sexual affection for one of their own sex.


Notice the word chooses in this definition. To clarify, I mean choose in the context that the people who are gay, weather they have biological or emotional problems or not, choose to act in the manor that they do; one does not choose to become a homosexual because it sounded fun or everyone else is doing it.

So the first question. Is homosexuality bad? To do this lets define bad, in 2 ways in fact…

Bad:
1. Causing or liable to cause sickness or ill health; injurious or harmful

2. Invalid, unsound, or false.

For the first definition of bad, we need to see if homosexuality hurts anyone. At first, you might think not “it’s just two people in love, what is wrong with that?” I researched this question online, and I will try to summarize it here “if you want to read the whole article which I recommend, I provided the link below”

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/februaryweb-only/2-16-41.0.html?start=2

This article sums up the negativity homosexual marriages into two categories, as well as a third to end and conclude the article…

1. Changing the definition of Marriage

To go through with this point here is a definition of marriage…

Marriage: the social institution under which a man and woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc.

Notice the word commitment, which means devotion, which is self explanatory. It is assumed in marriages that if you are getting married you will be with this person for a very long time if not for ever, and that you must not “cheat” your wife by sleeping with another woman or vice versa a woman sleeping with another man. In reading the article I saw that they made a claim that many gay marriages are open, or that there are other sexual partners involved. The link was broken to the site, so I searched it in Google, here’s what I found from the New York Times…


“New research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.
That consent is key. “With straight people, its called affairs or cheating,” said Colleen Hoff, the study’s principal investigator, “but with gay people it does not have such negative connotations.” From (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetro.html)


There should be warning bells going off in your head by now. In gay marriages, not only is there a LOT of cheating going on, but they are OK with it! This goes completely against the definition of marriage, what would even be the point of marriage if you are going to have multiple partners? It just is not natural or even sound, definition 2 of “bad”

2. What about the children?

A good question indeed, what is the youth getting from this? In reading the article, I read the following…
“Research has also shown that children raised by homosexuals were more dissatisfied with their own gender, suffer a greater rate of molestation within the family, and have homosexual experiences more often.
Gay marriage will also encourage teens who are unsure of their sexuality to embrace a lifestyle that suffers high rates of suicide, depression, HIV, drug abuse, STDs, and other pathogens.”

Not only this, but the confusion and brainwashing that go on in a child’s life in this situation must be horrible. The child would think this same sex marriage was a natural part of life “in which I will prove it is NOT later”, just like a male female marriage.


Going back in time, we can also relate homosexuality with early sex or sex before marriage or in schools. Believe it or not, the world used to believe it unthinkable that kids in middle-school would get pregnant and have sex. What did we do about? We invented sex education. Instead of reverting to the natural “waiting for sex till marriage”, we educated them to do it safely. We now know our mistake, there are now many abortions and overstressed children with their own children, as well as the confusion involved. If we controlled it better maybe we would not be in this mess. Who is to say the same won’t happen with the subject of gay behavior and same sex marriage? Should we just give in to our desires and say that it is wrong and help to make it safe?


For the rest of this post, I will concentrate on the natural part of this topic, or why it is bad in the sense of false or invalid. In my previous post we determined we have a sense of right and wrong, and not just instinct. In my studies and college classes, I learned how to see if something is natural or not, in which I will put the gay behavior on the hot seat.

For something to be a natural law, it has to work. For now, to be basic, let’s say not murdering someone was NOT a natural law, that is, it is morally OK to murder. What we must do now is this; we globalize the rule, now everyone must kill someone, its law. What happens? Everyone dies because everyone kills each other. Stealing… everyone must steal. What happens? There’s no such thing as private property, everything is up for grabs. Now that I have given some examples, I will use the gay behavior. People say to be gay is natural, so let’s try it using the “king of the world” method (what I used above)

“I am king of the world, and I am gay. Whatever I say goes, and I say every man must marry man and every woman must marry a woman, and no one must have sex with a human of the other sex.”

So in this decree, you see the error. If this is the case, than humans could no longer reproduce and the human population would die out. This would put the gay behavior in definition 2 of bad: Invalid, it does not work. Not only does it not work in the natural sense, it goes against instinct (to reproduce for offspring, not pleasure) and morality (It brings pain to others and it is not right, as well as changing the definition of something most people consider in the utmost importance, religious or not)

In conclusion, it is my view, along with these FACTS, that gay marriage and the behavior is WRONG and UNNATURAL.


Note from the Author

Although I believe the lifestyle mention above is wrong, and I completely disagree with them, I do not hate anyone who is living this way and I do not believe they will be condemned if they know Jesus Christ our savior. I am also not saying that all gay people are prideful about their status, I’m sure there are many people in this world that are struggling with emotional problems as well as biological problems that put them in this state of thinking, in recognition I sympathize for those who are confused and seek council rather than take pride in their abnormality and rally for it to be standardized.

How do we know God exists?

Let’s be honest. There is no physical evidence on planet earth that you can pick up and hold and claim that it is made by God and every single person would believe you. To do so would be like taking the a painting and claiming it was painted by the original artist: studying the creation to prove the creator. Now let me skip that and go to point one.
Point 1: Morality
As humans, most people would say there is a right and wrong, we know murdering to be wrong, stealing to be wrong, among other things that we feel uneasy about. Now, imagine that there is no God and we all evolved from apes or what not. This question pops up: Where did we get our sense of right or wrong? Why don’t humans have the same survival instinct as other animals? The problem is this. If you think about it, instincts and moral issues and consciences are opposites. We would find it absurd to see a Tiger brining back a baby of another species it was about to have for supper because it felt guilty or humans eating their own best friend to survive without having any guilt or second thoughts. Instincts focus on the self, morality and consciences focus on the wellbeing of others or what ought to be done. If the world was created by purely chemicals, there would be no “aught” or “should”, but it would be an “anything goes world” and “do what’s best for yourself” kind of place. Fortunately that is not the case, it would be chaotic! Most people know what’s right and wrong, and that requires someone to define it, which is God.

Point 2: 0+0=1? / F(0) = pi F = ?
Math: it is absolute and no one argues with it. 3rd and 4th graders learn this and do not argue with it because it is truth; we all know 1+1 to be 2. First to prove my second point is this. The earth and the universe is something, so we will call something true, or in binary terms, equal to one. Nothing, as we know in math, is 0. In saying that the universe came from nothing is like saying that 1 was derived from 0. There is no arguing that something comes from something and nothing comes from nothing, it is common sense. However, if we were to add something to nothing, it would be something. Assuming that god is something “1”, we could mathematically conclude that nothingness “0” plus God “1” = the world, another something “1”, so 0+1 = 1. To further prove my point, the Universe is a LOT more complex than one. Ask any scientists that studies such things and they would agree, I believe even that if the earth was a bit closer or further from the sun we could not even survive. Mathematically, lets make the universe equal to PI, the number that is still trying to be fully defined by mathematicians, just as scientists are still trying to fully understand the universe. To say that the universe came from nothing, is like saying there is a function that exists that zero can equal Pi exactly without adding a number (or something), for if you just add the number itself, it does not explain how it got from zero to itself, it only makes it so. So then we need to come to a conclusion that something and nothing had to be in place, and that something had to know what he was doing, just like a mathematician calculating Pi.