Diary

Why Not Everyone is Wrong about the Gay Marriage Debate

This diary is written in response to a diary written by Shoutbits which was posted on Red State the 27th of June. It was titled “Everyone is wrong on gay marriage” and was written several days after New York became the sixth state to legalize gay marriage last week Friday.

Shoutbits argues that the gay community has not accomplished much with the legalization of gay marriage in New York because what they truly crave is for acceptance from society and this has not and will not cause those who oppose them to have a change of belief. The only thing they’ve gained was to have the same legal benefits the law provides for married couples. On the other hand, conservatives are wrong for wanting the government to ban gay marriage and define marriage, because they should really be fighting to keep the government totally out of marriage.

What bothered me so greatly about his diary which compelled me to do more than comment, but to write a diary in response, is because the debate regarding gay marriage is really not whether it is or isn’t acceptable because if you look past in the history of this world at every country and religion and every moral person believed in traditional marriage as the only definition of marriage and homosexuality has never been accepted. The debate regarding gay marriage is whether the government should recognize homosexuals as a form and definition of marriage.

Shoutbits wrote:

The government should not endorse gay marriage; the government should get out of the marriage business altogether. Most of all, nobody should look to the government for validation of his life or defense of his religion. The governments of the US are corrupt, capricious, and are the biggest threat to the nation’s survival. Why should anyone expect such bodies to arbitrate morals?

When this country was founded as a country by religious people it wasn’t considered as such, not because the government got involved but because the concept of calling homosexuals as married simply didn’t exist.

This is proven because before the last couple of decades when conservatives and liberals took positions on this topic and involved the government, no one in the first over two hundred years requested the government to intervene because it was automatically understood that marriage has only one definition. Doing something immoral doesn’t constitute as marriage, and calling it as such doesn’t make the act a moral thing to do.

Human beings of all times, have always understood and believed that marriage is a sacred bond between one man and woman, thus there had been no request to change the definition of marriage. Morality is something that each of us has been created with, and someone that does or believes in immorality goes against the grain of his/her nature. This is proven with the fact that all animals follow the true definition of marriage, because they too have been created as such. Humans who have been given the power to choose between good and evil, unlike animals which lead their lives based on ingrained instinct, must rise to do that which is correct. Otherwise, such humans are considered worse than animals, which do what’s right without thought.

This world has already experienced a time when society totally crumbled and all moral behavior fall aside, as happened in the days of Noah.

The Big Flood which came because of the erosion of any semblance of morality. The filth and impurity of the people caused the animals to act immorally as well. In order to save the existence of the world which couldn’t handle the collapse of morality, Noah was commanded to build an Ark in which he, his family, and pairs of animals which have not practiced immorality resided while the rest of the world was cleansed of impurity.

There is a right side and wrong side to this debate, as in most issues, and in this case those who have been and are continuing to oppose those that are attempting to change the definition of marriage and are for the legalization of gay marriage  definition, are on the right side. For anyone claiming that homosexuals are part of the society and there’s no point in opposing them, it must be pointed out that any state that had given the voters the option to vote on gay marriage including liberal California, has always resulted in the people voting against it. They did so not because of non-acceptance, but for the refusal to allow the values that America has been built on to go down the moral drain.

This country has already faced a moral decision when deciding whether it’s pro-life or pro-choice. The result has been that anyone speaking out against abortion is accused of having no mercy on rape victims and as someone who doesn’t want to provide rape victims with the help they require. A fetus/unborn child has already lost its rights and its value has been reduced to a mass of tissue.

The path of the gay activists and equal rights fighters are leading to the destruction of the value of marriage. Marriage has always been a sacred bond between a male and a female through which future generations were created and raised. Gay marriage has no future besides for destroying the moral values of society.

Opposition against gay marriage has nothing to do with equality or acceptability. People who oppose homosexuals simply take issue with the values those people display. To them it’s strictly a question of morality and whether they take the moral or immoral side of the issue. And moral issues are not something they take lightly or are flexible about in the least bit.

Abie Rubin blogs at TheThinkingVoter.blogspot.com and can be followed on twitter.