If two men or two women wish to get married to each other completely absent of a sexual relationship, what would the Christian's complaint be? They cannot complain about sexual immorality. They cannot complain that a marriage without sex is against the Bible's teachings (celibacy in marriage was to be admired - Paul). So by what justification could a Christian claim that a marriage between two celibate people of the same sex is contrary to Christianity?

Since when did irrational people listen to logic?

how is this a question about gay marriage?
wonder which bible i should set my Nook to so i can start thumping it?

Mehar

+1

Do Christians actually complain about celibate gay marriages? Does any sane person actually want a celibate marriage? Has this question actually come up anywhere outside this forum?

The complaint would surround the original definition of marriage. You should never use the term marriage for same sex unions.

And no, I don't care what gay people do or if they get civil unions for legal benefits that marriages provide. Just use the correct terminology.

Marriage: the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law

There is no requirement in the definition to have sex.

the problem is that the government in the usa has taken the religious term "marriage" and applied it to civil contracts.
if you go see a justice of the peace to get married, you shouldn't be getting married. you should be getting civil unioned. you should apply for a civil union license, and if you want a marriage, you have a church or whatever perform it, in a religious context.

but, as jabberwocky said, irrational people are irrational.

also, do me a favor and don't lump all Christians into the same category. some of us are more openminded than others, just as some americans are more openminded, and some europeans are, and some muslims are, and some women are, etc. GENERALIZATION IS ALWAYS BAD :D

rational people are a myth. most people just use some kinda crazy logic to prove that they are rational, which is an irrational act to begin with.

why do they feel the need to prove that they are rational?

Why are you narrowing it to Christianity?

Why don't you involve Islam while you're at it? Where the penalties for a same sex relationship in a Muslim nation is usually met with death.

The following are excerpts on homosexuality, taken from the Saudi Ministry of Education Textbooks for Islamic Studies:

"Homosexuality is one of the most disgusting sins and greatest crimes.... It is a vile perversion that goes against sound nature, and is one of the most corrupting and hideous sins.... The punishment for homosexuality is death. Both the active and passive participants are to be killed whether or not they have previously had sexual intercourse in the context of a legal marriage.... Some of the companions of the Prophet stated that [the perpetrator] is to be burned with fire. It has also been said that he should be stoned, or thrown from a high place."

Saudi Ministry of Education Textbooks for Islamic Studies: 2007-2008 Academic Year
Center for Religious Freedom of Hudson Institute"

**Please note that you don't state anything about the USA in your original post and therefore I will not assume you are directing it directly towards Christians in the United States of America.

I don't know much about religion but I can't think of a reason. I don't agree with gay people. I don't approve of that lifestyle but that is my own morality.

But on the flip side... If two gay people want to get married why does it have to be a legal marriage? Why can't they just be married? Why is a piece of paper so important? Do gay people want me to "accept" them for being gay even if I don't approve? Why do you want to force your lifestyle on me? Why do I have to accept you being gay?

ps. Zen I'm talking to you! OHHNOHEDIDNT

on the flip side .... If women or blacks want to vote, why does it have to be a legal vote?

my idealistic americanocentric perspective says to me that the government should be an all-or-nothing thing. either everybody has the right or nobody does.

i'm not talking about anybody accepting gay marriage

i know several straight couples that i don't approve of as being married, and yet, they still are :P

+1

Point taken, but it's still a question of I don't approve of being gay. And that will never change because that is how I feel. Am I going to be rude, mean, or otherwise disrespectful to anyone gay that I run across in my life? No, I'm not that kind of a person. But on a internet message board I think I can express that being gay is wrong and I don't approve.

Can you point me to Christian teachings that marriage without sex is ok. Also, I didn't think a marriage is truly recognized until it is consecrated...

http://www.biblestudy.org/...better-than-marriage.html

maybe you didn't mean me.

Sure requiem, h u don't have to approve of gayness, same way as I don't have to approve people of being straight. Probably 90-95% of my fellow 'mos always felt they were attracted to the same sex, so while a rareity, it is a part of nature.

And I'm for gay marriage, just I won't get one, cuz I'm against all religion.

So you're gay?

Cool. I can't wait to participate in the burning of them gaylords when the Muslims eventually take over the world.. Woot woot.

meh. looks like the Muslims will get nuked soon as somebody elects a gay president.

Yep... I've been on this same line of thinking since before the last Presidential election. Nobody should be getting a government sanctioned marriage. Marriage should remain a religious matter / sacrament / institution / whatever.

I think the idea of marriage has gone down fluffter... But I don't blame homosexuals. I blame the producers of the bachelor and the bachelorette.

How about you pull yourself out of the center of the universe. Gays wanting the right have nothing to do with you. But there can be a lot of reason for them to want to get married.

- Car insurance is a lower rate if you are married.
- It cheaper for two people to go on one health insurance plan rather than two separate.
- Income taxes
- Adoption, or a female half of a lesbian couple giving birth
- Inheritance rights, wrongful death at work, gift tax, pension, etc., etc.

Those are just a few reasons I can think of off the top of my head. This will also put an end to one of the couples adopting the other. This is done a lot by same sex couples in the past, to get around some laws.

There is one thing to think of as more and more states that allow gay marriages. I'm already married, but now I want a second wife. We allow two people of the same sex marry, why can't I have a second wife. Or what about Rockman? He's been courting his sheep friend for over 10 years, that's longer that most marriages. Why should he not be allowed to marry the sheep?

those mostly sound like reasons to initiate class action lawsuits because of discrimination or preferential treatment to me. ain't no guarantee a married person is going to behave responsibly or should get cut breaks because they can say I Do.

Papa Smurf - Not sure if you are serious or not. But, regarding Plural Marriage, same as before... It should not be a government issue. One church may recognize plural marriage while another (and likely most) will not.

The questions should be:

1. Can you enter into a contract-law based institution with three people (civil union)

2. Does the government have any reason / interest to convey legal benefits to such contracts?

When thinking about contract law and civil unions, these things should be separated. Having a contract law institution that does things like provide common ownership or partial power-of-attorney is a matter of contract law. What benefits a government chooses to bestow on such bilateral or multilateral contract relationships, such as income tax benefits, SS benefits, etc. is another issue entirely.

So when thinking about your list above, you should ask about each item - is this something we can achieve under existing contract law, outside "marriage" or is this something that requires a government recognition of the type of union we contemplate? If it is the latter, you'll need to justify why it is in the government's interest to do so.

Wow, you're a dumbfluff. By the look of your post, you were okay with blacks having less rights than whites. You were okay with women not having the same rights as men. Getting a marriage allows you certain rights. I'm not going to get into the financial reasons - but just list this one. Currently, if you were in a gay relationship, you wouldn't be able to stay with your spouse in the hospital since technically you're not a legal spouse or family.

As for the second part of your retarded post:

'Do gay people want me to "accept" them for being gay even if I don't approve? Why do you want to force your lifestyle on me? Why do I have to accept you being gay?'

Gay people don't give a flying fluff what the hell you do/don't accept. Unless some guy is trying to drive his fluff down your throat, I'm pretty sure he's not forcing his lifestyle on you. Get real. You don't have to accept them being gay - however - you should accept them as being human and deserving of the same fluffing rights you have.

Good god you are stupid.

i disagree Trife, gay people are out there protesting right and left. it doesn't matter that i don't care who they are fluffing because it really ain't any of my business, but they have to keep throwing it out there like it's something important. it ain't nothing more than assisted masturbation. quit trying to act like it has some deep and profound meaning and should be respected.

i agree that people shouldn't be beat up and killed because of it. that's about the best i can do.

Equal rights isn't important? If you had less rights as another person next door would you not think it's a big deal?

I love to fluff !!

i do have less rights than a married person. heck, i have to pay for their kids to go to school. doesn't really matter that i'll probably never have kids of my own. stick it in your ear.

i also have less rights than a non-smoker and less rights than a non-drinker.

i ain't nothing but a peon to suck money out of. good thing y'all don't really care who i bonk on the head to make money.

Trife is gay.

ZEN is a sexy God Beast of a Man. err, wait, i used that line on another forum...

You're the dumbfluff. You not only are putting words into my mouth but you are making assumptions about what I would "think".

You're gay.

Trife is technically an AT troll, you're best bet at winning is to keep him occupied so that he doesn't notice that the sun came up.

Winning? How do you win at posting an opinion?

LOLERBLADES

you get more people pissed at him than they are at you.

Creates more accounts...

way ahead of you. Narf.

if your against gays you should also be against straight people as they the ones who keep havin those gays...

you're essentially distracting people from noticing what i consider a valid opinion, though i'm a bit biased because it is my opinion, however, i have yet to see why homosexuals should be rewarded for their behavior which is actually something that can be controlled. should they suffer emotional difficulties because of their feelings? no... but should they be rewarded for them?

ain't against them, just want to know why they should get extra rights if they ain't going to go around birthing any babies.

what's extra? curious.

i dunno. whatever rights that the hetrosexual couples have that the gay couples don't have.

though i have doubts about it due to some privacy things where a spouse isn't allowed to have access to the other spouse's psychiatric examination. but, but, but, we're married and she's my property beotch!

i mean if you're trolling, that's fine

at least in the states, everybody is supposed to be equal, meaning nobody has "extra" rights.

it's hard to turn off the idealism :p

married people have extra rights, or maybe it would be better to state that they have inferred rights due to the relationship.

my spouse would have the right to visit me in a hospital, even if i'd rather that my girlfriend was the one i wanted to see.

http://www.nolo.com/...ights-benefits-30190.html

Same-Sex Marriage, Civil Unions, and Domestic Partnerships

If you are in a same-sex marriage in one of the states where same-sex marriage is allowed (Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and D.C.), or if you are in a domestic partnership or civil union in any of the states that offer those relationship options, none of the benefits of marriage under federal law will apply to you, because the federal government does not recognize these same-sex relationships. For example, you may not file joint federal income tax returns with your partner, even if your state allows you to file taxes jointly. And other federal benefits, such as Social Security death benefits and COBRA continuation insurance coverage, may not apply.

does that also apply to common law marriages?

i thought he made it quite obvious. does it really matter?

personally i love girl on girl action, gayness isnt always bad :P

i know that i can specify a beneficiary for life insurance, but beings as i'm single, am i denied the right to specify that someone gets my Social Security death benefits? what do they do with my money if i don't marry in time for someone to benefit from my death?

don't worry about SS. death benefits for a spouse that will be going way soon enough