A judge's personal interpretations of Gods will does not make it a religious issue for anyone but that Judge. Homosexuality is specifically addressed in many religious holy texts, and to me, that is the difference. Regardless, it's not only the religious who oppose homosexual marriage.
And for that matter, they could be unforeseen positive ramifications...
The trick with any change is do your best to predict the positive and negative effects, then decide to go for it or not based on those factors.
One major problem, as I see it, with the current government and system, is that issues are solved by bandaging the problem with a cheap and/or unsanitary dressing.
It either falls off, malfunctions in some way, infects the wound, or some combination of the three.
And then you fix THAT issue using the same method.
Either that, or our governmental system never predicts the positive and negative effects correctly.
Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~ R. Buckminster Fuller
Might as well look on the bright side: there will be unforeseen benefits as well.
The future is unknowable.
Leviticus 20:24 says:
Exodus 33:16:But I have said unto you, Ye shall inherit their land, and I will give it unto you to possess it, a land that floweth with milk and honey: I [am] the LORD your God, which have separated you from [other] people.
Joshua 23:12-13:For how shall it be known that I have found favor in your sight, I and your people? Is it not in your going with us, so that we are distinct, I and your people, from every other people on the face of the earth?"
Deuteronomy 7:3:For if you ever go back and cling to the rest of these nations, these which remain among you, and intermarry with them, so that you associate with them and they with you, know with certainty that the LORD your God will not continue to drive these nations out from before you; but they will be a snare and a trap to you, and a whip on your sides and thorns in your eyes, until you perish from off this good land which the LORD your God has given you.
2 Corinthians 6:14:neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
Acts 17:24-26:Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
I think it's fair to say that these passages are at least as clearly anti-interracial marriage as the usual suspect passages are anti-gay marriage (or, more generally, anti-homosexuality). In fact, just looking up those Biblical passages somehow made the interracial marriage analogy even more accurate than I had already thought it was. The thing that bothers me the most is that people don't even seem to care to back up their statements. It only took me about 10 minutes of research to find evidence against your assertion that there was no reference to interracial marriage in religious texts, and yet you use that assertion as a foundation of your argument.God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands; Neither is worshipped with men's hands, as though he needed any thing, seeing he giveth to all life, and breath, and all things; And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation
It seems unbelievable now that these passages could have been used to condemn interracial marriage as sinful and contradictory to God's will, but the fact is that people genuinely believed that that was the truth, and then they somehow convinced themselves it wasn't discriminatory because it was God's word. It's not like I'm not making it up. People really believed that the races shouldn't mix, and those are some of the Biblical passages that they construed to support their view, a view which, in my opinion, was almost certainly rooted in some deeper level of discomfort with the idea and with breaking the status quo.
I mean seriously, how much more valid can this analogy get? It's so similar I can hardly believe anyone would try to deny it at this point. If people want to simply ignore the concept of context and accept these outdated interpretations about what marriage is and isn't, then that's fine, they can live in their fantasy world where Biblical interpretations have never evolved at any point in history. But don't dare try paint over history with absurd illusions that this is somehow completely different from the shamefully late cultural, moral and legal awakening that gave interracial couples the right to marry.
Last edited by sweEt Mauritius; 06-18-10 at 01:22 AM.
"Never fear. Him is here" - Captain Chaos (Dom DeLuise), Cannonball Run
Mace Windu: Then our worst fears have been realized. We must move quickly if the Jedi Order is to survive.
Further, because a preacher, priest, imam, or rabbi believes something regarding a secular issue doesn't mean the entirety of their particular religion believes the same.
What I've seen, universally, is that all Christians believe homosexuality is a sin since it IS specifically addressed in the bible. The few Muslims I know believe the same.
I'm not here to defend religion, I'm just saying there is a fundamental difference to the opposiotions of the two separate issues.