Whose bed is it?
Nov. 13th, 2011 12:03 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
missmaryrI was reading the news when the matter of the legality of same sex marriage came up, and got me just plain riled.
First off, I am going to reference an article I saw once, that I think every single religion should take up: We may or may not approve of same-sex relationships, but we do not have the right to judge others. Only God does.
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. All the claptrap that revolves around such is not 'family values'. Gays and lesbians in the closet have raised children for centuries without those children being affected any differently than a traditional marriage. It's not going to be any different now. Most people who have problem with same sex relationships go on about sin and family values when the real problem revolves about their personal distaste for the matter and their desire to desrtoy anything that goes against their world view. In other words, they're prejudiced in the same way the Nazis were (and are) against Jews and the KKK/white supremacists are against anyone who is not Caucasian.
Want to look at history? There was plenty of gay action going on, if you know where to look for it. Historically, we tend to throw out what we don't want our children to see, so digging is necessary. Greek, Babylonians, Romans,Egyptians, etc, saw nothing in gay relationships, as long as the family line was carried on.
Early Christians did frown on gay relationship; however, they also frowned on any kind of sex outside of marriage, according to Paul, and the only reason he approved of marriage is one, children were necessary, and two, you ain't going to have many converts if you disallow sex as a sin. Christianity would have died an early death otherwise, and he knew it, probably from personal experience.
Marriage was never intended to be for sex in the first place. Marriage was intended to protect children and property. Marriage for centuries was a means for social networking, irregardless of the feelings of the people involved.
In this day and age, do we need marriage for that? No. We began to regard marriage as an expression of devotion to a loved one. If we regard marriage as that, then there is absolutely no reason to block the marriages of two people who love each other and want to express that love formally.
In the legal sense, with marriage as a means to provide benefits through work for children and long-term or formal relationships, there needs to be another means to provide it. Registering as partners instead of marriage, maybe. Some cities provide that kind of registration as a means to get around common-law crap that is so screwed up it's not funny.
I think that what people do in their private life needs to be that-private, with one important exception: that no one is being hurt. Abuse is not appropriate in any form, of partners or of children. This CERTAINLY includes any kind of behavior that encourages sex between minors and adults. I have done enough social work to know that there is no such thing as a consenting child when it comes to sex. Children are ALWAYS damaged by sex, no matter what pedophiles tell you; I'm not speaking philosophically, but in real life, practical terms. They are not ready physically or emotionally for that kind of mature behavior, and they are always damaged by it in some way. Children cannot consent to sex. Even older adolescents are not ready for a mature relationship with an adult in the times that we live in. Sure, teenagers are going to mess around with each other. That is a normal exploration behavior of adolescents. But they still see adults as authority figures, and so any adult having sex with them is taking advantage of an inexperienced, immature partner. That is a form of abuse, and certainly an indication that something is wrong with that adult's morals and maturity.
In other words, folks, mind your own business!
First off, I am going to reference an article I saw once, that I think every single religion should take up: We may or may not approve of same-sex relationships, but we do not have the right to judge others. Only God does.
I wholeheartedly agree with this statement. All the claptrap that revolves around such is not 'family values'. Gays and lesbians in the closet have raised children for centuries without those children being affected any differently than a traditional marriage. It's not going to be any different now. Most people who have problem with same sex relationships go on about sin and family values when the real problem revolves about their personal distaste for the matter and their desire to desrtoy anything that goes against their world view. In other words, they're prejudiced in the same way the Nazis were (and are) against Jews and the KKK/white supremacists are against anyone who is not Caucasian.
Want to look at history? There was plenty of gay action going on, if you know where to look for it. Historically, we tend to throw out what we don't want our children to see, so digging is necessary. Greek, Babylonians, Romans,Egyptians, etc, saw nothing in gay relationships, as long as the family line was carried on.
Early Christians did frown on gay relationship; however, they also frowned on any kind of sex outside of marriage, according to Paul, and the only reason he approved of marriage is one, children were necessary, and two, you ain't going to have many converts if you disallow sex as a sin. Christianity would have died an early death otherwise, and he knew it, probably from personal experience.
Marriage was never intended to be for sex in the first place. Marriage was intended to protect children and property. Marriage for centuries was a means for social networking, irregardless of the feelings of the people involved.
In this day and age, do we need marriage for that? No. We began to regard marriage as an expression of devotion to a loved one. If we regard marriage as that, then there is absolutely no reason to block the marriages of two people who love each other and want to express that love formally.
In the legal sense, with marriage as a means to provide benefits through work for children and long-term or formal relationships, there needs to be another means to provide it. Registering as partners instead of marriage, maybe. Some cities provide that kind of registration as a means to get around common-law crap that is so screwed up it's not funny.
I think that what people do in their private life needs to be that-private, with one important exception: that no one is being hurt. Abuse is not appropriate in any form, of partners or of children. This CERTAINLY includes any kind of behavior that encourages sex between minors and adults. I have done enough social work to know that there is no such thing as a consenting child when it comes to sex. Children are ALWAYS damaged by sex, no matter what pedophiles tell you; I'm not speaking philosophically, but in real life, practical terms. They are not ready physically or emotionally for that kind of mature behavior, and they are always damaged by it in some way. Children cannot consent to sex. Even older adolescents are not ready for a mature relationship with an adult in the times that we live in. Sure, teenagers are going to mess around with each other. That is a normal exploration behavior of adolescents. But they still see adults as authority figures, and so any adult having sex with them is taking advantage of an inexperienced, immature partner. That is a form of abuse, and certainly an indication that something is wrong with that adult's morals and maturity.
In other words, folks, mind your own business!
