Silly gay marriage arguments

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

And I hope he bestows upon you a testimony.

I have a testimony of what's true and a testimony against the bullshit.

[SoCalCoug]

Originally Posted by SoCalCoug

I already love this thread.

But not in a homosexual kind of way.

[CardiacCoug]

OK, now that I have a little bit more time I'll explain why a just God would give Tex a gay son (or even better, transform him into a gay person).

For me, the feeling that permeates Tex's post is utter lack of empathy. Even other orthodox Mormons occasionally think "Wow, it would really be difficult to be a gay Mormon." It seems like Tex's attitude about this is "That could never happen to me or to someone I care about." The fact that he and others consider that attitude to be religious and Christlike is fascinating.

Here are the obvious responses for anyone who has actually met and been capable of empathizing with a gay person.

#1. Actually the issue of gay marriage does affect my family and many other families. I have a close relative who is gay. I remember when he was in his mid 20s and still single him saying something like, "I would love to be married someday, but I just haven't found anybody I want to marry." He was a returned missionary and devoted to the Church and I think he was still in denial about his sexual orientation. He's now in his 40s and has a long-term partner. I'm sure he would still like to be married and I can empathize with that desire because I love being married to my wife. It's the most important thing in my life and why would I want to deny somebody else that opportunity to be married and to call it a marriage?

#2, #3. For most people, being gay is not a choice. This is self-evident if you have ever talked to a gay person about how he figured out he was gay. Sexual orientation is not well understood, but saying it is a choice is ignorant. Even the apostles officially recognize this now. If you still don't, time to get in line with the Brethren and stop being purposefully ignorant about this issue.

#4, #5. My marriage and family is the most important thing in my life. No, it's not a "civil right" in the same way as the right to vote or to own property, etc. But I would want any other adult couple who wishes to have that same chance to be married to be able to be married. To equate a single person who can't find a partner with gay people who have chosen each other and want to be married again shows a total lack of empathy. It's not the same thing.

#6. Tex, I'm gonna assume you are a heterosexual. If a judge passed a law that you could only marry another guy, apparently your response would be, "OK, that's cool. At least I can still get married." I guess you really are a "cup half-full" kind of guy. Most gay people don't feel the same way. They would rather marry someone to whom they are attracted.

Overall, my main question for Tex is, "Are you utterly unable to empathize with gay people?" Sure seems that way. I'm fascinated that for you and others, part of having a testimony of Jesus Christ apparently includes an utter disregard for the feelings of your gay brothers and sisters. Who is your neighbor?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by Tex

Who is Chris Buttars? Is this the new Godwin's Law for CUF?

Google it.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Google it.

Nah.

[Tex]

Cardiac,

I was addressing specific, invalid logical arguments in favor of gay marriage, a topic quite separate from the emotional aspects to this issue. One can be completely unsympathetic or fully sympathetic to the plight of gays, and still recognize how silly the above arguments are. I do detect two new ones in your response, which I'll add to the list as follows:

7. We should allow gay marriage because gays really, really want it, and we feel bad for them.

And then this one, not really an argument for gay marriage but a logical fallacy nonetheless:

8. If you disagree with gay marriage, you obviously don't know anyone who's gay.

I trust I don't need to explain why neither of these are compelling arguments. All 8 of these statements have their foundation in ad hominems and appeals to emotion, rather than sound reasoning.

---

At the risk of veering off the point, I will briefly address your issue of empathy. It's not that I don't feel empathy for gays; I do, but not in the way you'd like. I feel bad for gays in the same way I feel bad for anyone who makes immoral choices. I have felt tremendous sorrow over some I have known who have made this choice, because I believe in the long run it puts them further at odds with God, and thus, with eternal happiness.

And this is the root of the problem for you and I: we cannot agree on a premise. You want me to accept homosexuality as axiomatically normal. I can't do that. But that doesn't mean I have no feeling at all towards the individuals it affects; it is, however, an entirely separate thing from the logical arguments in favor of and against gay marriage.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

Even the apostles officially recognize this now. If you still don't, time to get in line with the Brethren and stop being purposefully ignorant about this issue.

Adopting a gay lifestyle is a choice. This idea that the Brethren are on board with the not-a-choice-crowd is one of the more pernicious falsehoods propagated on this board, not to mention reflective of rampant wishful thinking.

What the Brethren have said--and I agree with--is that the temptation or weakness of homosexual feelings may be something someone is born with. But they have never acknowledge that a person is "born gay" in the sense you mean it.

I quote Elder Oaks, responding to his (hypothetical) gay 17-year-old son:

I think it’s important for you to understand that homosexuality, which you’ve spoken of, is not a noun that describes a condition. It’s an adjective that describes feelings or behavior. I encourage you, as you struggle with these challenges, not to think of yourself as a ‘something’ or ‘another,’ except that you’re a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and you’re my son, and that you’re struggling with challenges.

http://newsroom.lds.org/ldsnewsroom/...der-attraction

[CardiacCoug]

Originally Posted by Tex

Adopting a gay lifestyle is a choice. This idea that the Brethren are on board with the not-a-choice-crowd is one of the more pernicious falsehoods propagated on this board, not to mention reflective of rampant wishful thinking.

What the Brethren have said--and I agree with--is that the temptation or weakness of homosexual feelings may be something someone is born with. But they have never acknowledge that a person is "born gay" in the sense you mean it.

This is the most ridiculous game of semantics. If a man wants to have sex with men and doesn't want to have sex with women, then he is gay. Calling it "same sex attraction" or a "homosexual temptation" like Elder Oaks does doesn't make it something different.

Again, I don't believe you have ever talked to a gay person about this issue. They aren't "tempted" with "homosexual feelings." They are gay.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by CardiacCoug

This is the most ridiculous game of semantics. If a man wants to have sex with men and doesn't want to have sex with women, then he is gay. Calling it "same sex attraction" or a "homosexual temptation" like Elder Oaks does doesn't make it something different.

Again, I don't believe you have ever talked to a gay person about this issue. They aren't "tempted" with "homosexual feelings." They are gay.

Oh, I fully acknowledge that's what many of them say. And that's certainly what society tells them too. Unfortunately that doesn't reconcile itself to the fact that it's a highly immoral act offensive to God. Sin is what it is, and we're all guilty. No one has a right to rationalize that away on the basis that God hard-wired them that way, no matter the nature of the offense. These are just the kind of heart-rending challenges the atonement exists for.

You call it a semantics game, but words have meaning. The way you characterize an issue can have a huge impact on how you approach handling it, to say nothing of legislating it (i.e., gay marriage).

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Tex

Oh, I fully acknowledge that's what many of them say. And that's certainly what society tells them too. Unfortunately that doesn't reconcile itself to the fact that it's a highly immoral act offensive to God. Sin is what it is, and we're all guilty. No one has a right to rationalize that away on the basis that God hard-wired them that way, no matter the nature of the offense. These are just the kind of heart-rending challenges the atonement exists for.

You call it a semantics game, but words have meaning. The way you characterize an issue can have a huge impact on how you approach handling it, to say nothing of legislating it (i.e., gay marriage).

What's offensive to me, Tex?