I Don't Get It

[wlotus]

The new archbishop of New York says he will oppose Governor Patterson's same-sex marriage bill. I understand and respect the fact that the Roman Catholic church does not support same-sex relationships. I am not asking them to change their stance. Neither does the marriage bill. The Roman Catholic church would not be forced to perform same-sex marriages. All the bill means is that the state would give same-sex couples marriage licenses and would consider such couples married in the eyes of the law, with all of the legal protections offered any other married couple. It wouldn't affect the Roman Catholic church in any way. So why the opposition?

It's interesting that while those of us who support same-sex marriage are quite happy to allow those who oppose it to peacefully live out their private lives according to their convictions--live and let live--those who oppose it intend for the rest of the world to live under the weight of laws that support their opposition. That doesn't seem at all "righteous" to me.

Comments

[wlotus.livejournal.com]

I have heard the same thing. I have also heard that the one NT scripture used to justify prohibitions against same-sex relationships was talking about something entirely different than loving, committed couples, based on the language used in the original writings. The best I can say, though, is that it never made sense to me why a supposedly just, loving God would tell people who are same-sex loving to either remain celibate or suppress their natural inclinations and enter into opposite-sex relationships. That seems neither just, nor loving. I struggled with the idea until I came to the conclusion that a just, loving God would not be so callous.

[astragali.livejournal.com]

When I went to confirmation class in the Episcopal church, we were told that the New Testament reference was about the tendency of men at the time to have a wife and family, while also having a male lover. The verse was meant to instruct men that their wives and families should not suffer because the man was using family resources for his male partner.

It makes sense to me, at least.