I debated a girl on gay marriage (me taking a Catholic side of course), but need some clarification on a few topics.
- She said I was “judging them”, and I said I wasn’t judging the person, but them being gay. She then said that it was what they do that makes up the person. So I was judging them.
Being against gay marriage does not necessarily mean that you are judging the individual. However, the two frequently go hand in hand due to sin. If you think that because someone is gay, that they are more prone to violence, non-sexual sins or are a threat to others, you’re not living in reality and are indeed judging them. If you obsessively think about their sexual behavior and find that you’re angry and disgusted just by socializing with someone who is gay, than you are judging them. If you can only define marriage as “a union between a man and a woman” and nothing more, than you are judging them.
If however you understand that the attack and destruction of the idea of traditional marriage has been going on for decades and that gay marriage only affirms and cements in ideas about marriage that have been harming the institution of marriage for decades, than you are not judging them.
- What do I say when people ask me why I can’t simply live my life and let gays marry?
What I say is that I believe gay “marriage” is inevitable. It is the direction which society is sliding into. I believe in treating others with respect, but I do not see gay marriage as a human rights issue. I’m not going to mistreat gays and I will pick my battles, but when it comes to my civic responsibilities, I have to vote based on my conscience. Marriage to me is not about the rights people get when they civilly marry. To me, it is about the responsibility heterosexuals have toward the fact that the nature of their sexual expressions is procreative. It is safe to assume that most heterosexuals when they become sexually active will get pregnant. I believe that the ideal of marriage involves the ideal of waiting for sex until marriage so that heterosexuals will be more deliberate about who the father is of their children and will keep those fathers involved. I also believe that children naturally belong to their biological parents. I am opposed to surrogate motherhood, sperm donation and anything that demeans what it is to be a natural parent. I believe adoption is there to help the orphan. Beyond that, it is the biological parents who have the right to put their own children up for adoption, but it needs to be understood that children belong to their natural parents, not to society. The ideals behind marriage are difficult to achieve and many heterosexuals fail to live up to them, but the ideals of marriage are still important to society and the more we say that because these ideals are hard to achieve that we should just throw our hands up and think of marriage only in terms of our individualistic legal rights and benefits, the more we hurt the institution of marriage as a society.
- She said Jesus was accepting. Is this really in the Bible? What instances is he not accepting of people (or lifestyles)?
She is likely referencing that Jesus ate with Prostitutes, tax collectors and the outcasts of society. He condemned those who thought they were righteous and obsessed about living up to the letter of the law. He condemned the most religious as hypocrites, calling them to repentance. He told them that a repentant prostitute was closer to Heaven than those people assumed were the closest to Heaven. CS Lewis describes it as this. There are two types of ordinary people. There are the type that give up trying to be good and there are the type who deny themselves what they want in a grumbling way and complain that no one gives them credit for all that they’ve given up. Christ does not want us to do either. He wants us to give our entire selves to him. As such, we must recognize that we all are in need of repentance and grace. No one is holy enough to deserve Heaven. The problem with those who do strictly follow the letter of the law is that they pride themselves in doing so and see no need to repent. It is harder to repent of pure pride than it is to repent of lust. But that said, when a lustful person fails to repent, it is due to the sin of pride. Christ never called us to be indifferent about sin. His answer was always “Go and sin no more.” He accepted those who repented. Those who believe they are righteous are in spiritual danger.
- Isn’t outlawing gay marriage “pushing” Catholic beliefs on people?
Gay marriage is not outlawed or illegal. Gays can marry, but the definition of marriage does not fit with what gays want to do. It is only because heterosexuals have already been practicing forms of marriage that do not fit the definition of marriage that we are even debating this topic. I wouldn’t obsess about the homosexual issue. I personally think its like obsessing over someone kicking over the rubble of an already destroyed building.
- What if a man’s gay, but isn’t “active”? Is this still considered a sin?
Experiencing same sex attraction is not sinful. Sin involves choice, an act of the will. How you feel is not a choice.
(just kidding). It says a lot about our moral health that we’ve gotten so low as to even entertain the idea of debating male-male, female-female marriage, let alone do it.