Marriage as a fundamental right.

[Bravus]

No, silly, it's precisely the claim that homosexuality is a deviant behaviour that is being assumed in the absence of any evidence. The question on the floor is whether homosexuality causes psychological harm. Assuming it is deviant is assuming the answer to that question, rather than making a case for a particular answer.

[Dr. Shane]

In Straight & Narrow? Thomas Schmidt writes "...there is overwhelming evidence that certain mental disorders occur with much higher frequency among homosexuals. The most thoroughly documented problems are alcohol and drug abuse disorders, depression and suicide."

Arno Karlen writes in Sexuality and Homosexuality "Almost everyone who has written about homosexuality speaks of higher-than-average rates of depression and suicide among them, and some of this is attributed to the loneliness of aging."

I don't know how much evidence one needs that homosexual behavior is deviant. The word deviant simply means departing from the norm. Not all deviant behavior is harmful. Honoring the seventh day as the Sabbath is deviant in most parts of the world.

[SivartM]

I don't find it hard to believe that people who are basically outcasts are depressed and suicidal... I doubt that those feelings come from their orientation.

[Neil D]

In Straight & Narrow? Thomas Schmidt writes "...there is overwhelming evidence that certain mental disorders occur with much higher frequency among homosexuals. The most thoroughly documented problems are alcohol and drug abuse disorders, depression and suicide."

Arno Karlen writes in Sexuality and Homosexuality "Almost everyone who has written about homosexuality speaks of higher-than-average rates of depression and suicide among them, and some of this is attributed to the loneliness of aging."

I don't know how much evidence one needs that homosexual behavior is deviant. The word deviant simply means departing from the norm. Not all deviant behavior is harmful. Honoring the seventh day as the Sabbath is deviant in most parts of the world.

How come them, Shane, that this evidence was not presented to the California federal court in this last battle over gay rights? If there is this mental aberrancy, surely this can not be good for any children raised by a homosexual couple....

Or is this information about gays so much mis-information that no psychologist is not willing to voice these concerns to the California federal courts?

I am not trying to turn this political, but rather trying to measure the verasity of this information...

[John317]

...Arno Karlen writes in Sexuality and Homosexuality "Almost everyone who has written about homosexuality speaks of higher-than-average rates of depression and suicide among them, and some of this is attributed to the loneliness of aging."

The "gay life," particularly among males, is all about being young and good-looking. The younger you are the more desirable you are. Youth is always at a high premium. But after that is past, and the surface beauty gone with it, the gay life can be lonely & cruel.

[Overaged]

In the New York case, it was the "equal protection" clause of the New York Constitution which the judge ruled did not apply to gay marriage rights.

The fact is that every man in the United States has the right to marry a woman. Every woman in the United States has the right to marry a man. That is equal protection under the law. If a state were to pass a law stating that a gay man could not marry a woman, that would be a violation of the "equal protection" clause of the 14th Amendment. A gay man has just as much right to marry a woman as a heterosexual man does. If a state bans gay men from marrying other gay men, that ban must also apply to heterosexual men. If a homosexual man cannot marry another man, a heterosexual man cannot either. That is equal protection under the law.

Regardless how the Supreme Court may rule, the American people can pass a Constitutional Amendment to overrule the Supreme Court. The Family Marriage Amendment failed before because Congress said that the Defense of Marriage Act was enough. If the Defense of Marriage Act is ruled unconstitutional, we will be in an entirely new political environment.

This whole argument is really skewered. How on earth does one arrive at calling it "protection" to not allow gay marriage? Methinks the Consitution is being stretched to a place where it doesn't even belong.

[Bravus]

...and what is wonderful protection against 'the loneliness of aging'? Marriage!

[Dr. Shane]

is this information about gays so much mis-information that no psychologist is not willing to voice these concerns to the California federal courts?

I don't think so. As I stated earlier, the jury is still out. It has been said that if one wants to go someplace where people really hate each other, just attend one of these APA conventions. The majority of psychologists do not believe that homosexuality is a mental disorder but there are many members of the APA that still believe it is.

[Dr. Shane]

I don't find it hard to believe that people who are basically outcasts are depressed and suicidal...

Homosexuals are not outcasts today. Our movies, television programs and arts are filled with gays. Most every public university campus has gay organizations that provide counseling, support and affirmation for gays. With this drastic change in Society over the past 20 years, we would expect see this issues of depression, alcoholism, drug abuse and suicide become no greater among the gay community than among the population as a whole.

We, as Christians, know the problem is that homosexuals are living outside the will of God. God wasn't trying to be mean when He forbid the gay lifestyle. God knew that happiness could not be found there. Homosexuality is simply one more of Satan's counterfeits. We know that. Those of us that have fallen into sin, regardless which form it has been, know all too well that it doesn't bring the promised happiness we expected. The pleasures of sin are short lived. In that respect, homosexuality is no different than any other sin.

Over the noon hour today, I attended an AA meeting and gave a friend a ride to his home afterward. As we were visiting in my pick-up he shared with me that he is bi-sexual and asked me what my church believes about gays. He has a lot of respect for me and has told me so on many occasions. I told him our church accepts gays but teaches that they should cease their homosexual behavior and that we do not see it as any greater sin than other sins. Interestingly, when discussing gay marriage with him and raising my concern about the conflict with religious liberty, he was able to see my perspective on that and was not able to say which way he felt about it.

[Dr. Shane]

...and what is wonderful protection against 'the loneliness of aging'? Marriage!

Marriage is the #1 cause for divorce. It has been known not to protect one against loneliness and aging. In areas where gay marriage has been made legal, the average gay marriage lasts a little over two years. The average heterosexual marriage last about 23 years. Moreover, two gay people that want to make a life together, need not get "married." Two heterosexual people that want to make a life together, need not get married either.

[Overaged]

Originally Posted By: Bravus

...and what is wonderful protection against 'the loneliness of aging'? Marriage!

Marriage is the #1 cause for divorce. It has been known not to protect one against loneliness and aging. In areas where gay marriage has been made legal, the average gay marriage lasts a little over two years. The average heterosexual marriage last about 23 years. Moreover, two gay people that want to make a life together, need not get "married." Two heterosexual people that want to make a life together, need not get married either.

Marriage is not the #1 cause of divorce. What kind of reference could you possibly give to prove this? And again; how can you believe what you just wrote? It is never marriage that is the cause of divorce; it is people. To say what you do here is to say that what God wrote about it isn't right. If marriage is the cause of divorce; then you accuse God of breaking up families.

Marriage and the Sabbath have been jointly under attack right from Eden. Talking about it all as if it's just a matter of definitions and "rights" makes a mockery out of God's Word and character, and aids the enemy in His warfare against marriage and the Sabbath.

[Gerr]

If some of the evidence is flawed, the solution is not to throw out all evidence (as noted, that just leaves us with our existing assumptions unchallenged) but to seek out unflawed evidence.

The truth is out there.

If such unbiased evidence is available, let the world see it. Let the background of the researchers be made known as well as the methodology. Truth, after all, is what we're after.

BTW, how can a Christian approve of a law or passing into law, legalizing a union considered (by Christians) to be abnormal and immoral? And then including such unions under the term of "marriage" which has been traditionally and historically throughout human history, regarded as the union of a man and a woman?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Not to be funny, but one can't have a divorce without first being married. So saying that marriage is the #1 cause of divorce...I can't quite get my head around that..

[Bravus]

Yeah, that comment by Shane did seem a bit like destroying the village in order to save it: denigrating marriage as not being that good so gays won't want it. But still reserving it for straights as though it's something to be protected.

Shane, it's true that the culture in general is more friendly to gay people, but the church decidedly isn't. Gay people who are Christian receive messages all the time that they - their very being, not just their actions - are abominable to God. I know that's not scriptural and I know it's not what you do, but it's what they experience in the church. The interview transcripts in the thesis are heartbreaking reading. And depression is very unsurprising.

Incidentally, the Arno Karlen book John317 cited is from 1971: our ideas have moved on just a little in the past 40 years... as have trends in what happens for homosexual people in their lives.

I'm not at all denying that there's a gay 'scene' that involves a lot of clubbing and partying with drink, drugs and sex. There's also a straight 'scene' that's the same, but a higher proportion of gay people participate. That would go a long way to explaining the drink and drug problems.

But, in general, those aren't the people who are seeking to marry. The community is broad and diverse, and while I respect people's personal experiences, their experiences only encompass one area and one era.

[Bravus]

Gerry, it's incumbent on the person making the claim to bring the evidence: let's see yours. As I said, I've looked at a lot of evidence, quite recently, and am not seeing what you're claiming.

I'll try to post something, but I can foresee the result: in some way there'll be found to be something wrong with the background of the researcher or the methodology, unless the research supports your existing position.

The shift to 'how can Christians...?' is a separate issue.

[Dr. Shane]

It is quite simple. The one thing all divorced people have in common is that they were at one time married. It is an old adage. Once cannot get divorced if they do not first get married. Bravus was making a point that marriage is protection against becoming lonely in old age. Of course that holds true only if one does not get divorced... and even then... some people are lonely while married.

[Bravus]

Oh, and while we're on it, yes, in the sense that homosexuality is not the norm - the orientation with the majority of the population - then in that technical sense it is 'deviant'. But in that sense, so is left-handedness. We don't deny rights to left-handed people on that basis...

[Dr. Shane]

Shane, it's true that the culture in general is more friendly to gay people, but the church decidedly isn't.

I have to disagree. There are more gay churches today than ever before and more mainstream church accepting the gay lifestyle.

If rejection by organized religion causes one to be more likely to suffer depression, alcoholism, drug addiction and commit suicide, then atheistic evolutionists should be right in there with gays.

[Dr. Shane]

The issue is redefining marriage to accommodate same-sex couples. The issue isn't about denying gays the right to marry. The debate is over whether or not that is even possible. If marriage is between two opposites, than gay marriage is not possible. The issue comes down to who has the right to define what marriage is. In the United States we have limited marriage in such a way to ban incestuous and polygamous marriages. So there is a precedent to allow a limited definition of marriage.

On an interesting note, when my friend today told me he was bi-sexual he told me that he will #### anything except children. To clarify what he meant he told me; women, men, dogs, anything that feels good. I couldn't help but think of those on this forum that have been giving Dr. Gerry a hard time for suggesting that some will one day want to marry animals. Just think, if a guy can marry his dog, maybe his employee health benefits will pay the vet bills.

[Overaged]

Shane, it's true that the culture in general is more friendly to gay people, but the church decidedly isn't. Gay people who are Christian receive messages all the time that they - their very being, not just their actions - are abominable to God. I know that's not scriptural and I know it's not what you do, but it's what they experience in the church.

Well boo hoo hoo. As if gays are the only ones that get this kind of treatment. I have gotten the exact same treatment for not wearing the right clothes!

But whatever the case; it's certainly no excuse to let them "marry." That won't fix the problem. People need to learn to treat each other like human beings; we should all know that. But what no one seems to know is why we call it "marriage" if it's "gay." It cannot be seen as anything but an attack on the family and marriage as God has ordained it. It goes well beyond a simple "rights" issue, and personal preferences of "definition."

I have had gays challenge me to hold hands with one of them and walk down the street with them to see what it [marriage] "feels like;" so they obviously have no clue what it is really about. How can they?

[Overaged]

The issue is redefining marriage to accommodate same-sex couples. The issue isn't about denying gays the right to marry. The debate is over whether or not that is even possible. If marriage is between two opposites, than gay marriage is not possible. The issue comes down to who has the right to define what marriage is. In the United States we have limited marriage in such a way to ban incestuous and polygamous marriages. So there is a precedent to allow a limited definition of marriage.

On an interesting note, when my friend today told me he was bi-sexual he told me that he will #### anything except children. To clarify what he meant he told me; women, men, dogs, anything that feels good. I couldn't help but think of those on this forum that have been giving Dr. Gerry a hard time for suggesting that some will one day want to marry animals. Just think, if a guy can marry his dog, maybe his employee health benefits will pay the vet bills.

But Shane; the issue does not come down to that at all; just because you or others say it does. God has already defined marriage. Who has the right to change His Word? And what has historically happened to people and societies that have tried to? How can it even be a question regarding whether or not gay marriage "is even possible?"

I do appreciate the fact you are trying to reach out to this person you have mentioned who is gay; that effort cannot be faulted.

[SivartM]

But whatever the case; it's certainly no excuse to let them "marry." That won't fix the problem. People need to learn to treat each other like human beings; we should all know that. But what no one seems to know is why we call it "marriage" if it's "gay." It cannot be seen as anything but an attack on the family and marriage as God has ordained it. It goes well beyond a simple "rights" issue, and personal preferences of "definition."

Of course it's about definition... we've redefined marriage in the United States to not include polygamy (sorry to mention that again, but it's true...).

[Overaged]

Of course it's about definition... we've redefined marriage in the United States to not include polygamy (sorry to mention that again, but it's true...).

Well; I would have to respectfully disagree with that; the original definition of marriage did not include "polygamy." People have been "redefining" marriage for a long time.

[Dr. Shane]

I do appreciate the fact you are trying to reach out to this person you have mentioned who is gay; that effort cannot be faulted.

I am pretty friendly with everyone. I didn't know until today that this man is gay although I have given him rides home before and helped him in other ways.

You want to know the honest truth about what I think about him? He had told me before that he is a communist. If I hold anything against him, or think poorly of him about anything, it would be him being a communist, not being gay.

[Overaged]

You want to know the honest truth about what I think about him? He had told me before that he is a communist. If I hold anything against him, or think poorly of him about anything, it would be him being a communist, not being gay.

Well I tend to mostly agree with you, in principle, in this respect. My only disagreement is with use of and practice of the term "marriage."