Why are churches against gay marriage?

[Joan/Jonas]

I'm a teen...and come from a conservative Christian home. I've heard all the arguments both ways. The scriptural proof against it to me is more or less solid in the New Testament however the problem is this: Conservative Christian seems to have a propensity to focus on abortion and gay marriage both of which are, frankly, menial and non-salvation threatening issues. This in stark contrast to the over 2000 (??) times poverty and injustice are mentioned and linked to salvation. Why are they? It's more than them controlling marriage it's a belief with solid basis but too much emphasis.

[Annah]

I'm a teen...and come from a conservative Christian home. I've heard all the arguments both ways. The scriptural proof against it to me is more or less solid in the New Testament

Those anti homosexual versus in the New Testament isn't as solid as you may think. 1 Corinthians 6:9 doesn't mean homosexuals at all; the greek word alludes to someone who forces another person, through sexual coercion, into a sex trade.

Romans, Paul speaks against homosexuality, not in a sense of going against the gift of righteousness that God gives you, but because these are issues that may prevent you from focusing more on God. Paul uses the same language concerning straight marriage too "It is better not to marry but if you burn in lust then do so" (paraphrased).

[Constance]

The senior pastor at my church is a married out-of-the-closet lesbian. Oh, so is the associate pastor, too.

Don't believe me? Come on over to San Mateo, CA, on a Sunday and I'll introduce you to them.

Churches in general are not against gay marriage. No. There are those churches that are, true. But not all churches are.

[Julie Marie]

Other people drift too...

It's called train of thought, so common within human conversation one has to make a conscious effort to avoid it.  It's done here all the time.  The only time it becomes a real issue is when the thread gets hijacked.
...

Many churches now accept gay marriage.  I suspect the aversion that was long ago so prevalent just stemmed from old ways not evolving due to the fact no one really gave it much of a thought.  At least not until a strong gay movement brought discrimination to the table of discussion.  Things like DODT being repealed by the government have probably helped many religious organizations take a second look at their policies.

But there is still a substantial number of people who are against gay marriage and those people are led by very vocal, bigoted organizations that mask their real intentions with a religious affiliation.  And their followers follow because it's easier to let someone else do their thinking.  When you get all your information from a single source, there will always be those who recognize this and take advantage of it.  And behind every one of these bigoted actions there is a monetary motive.

[SandraJane]

It's called train of thought, so common within human conversation one has to make a conscious effort to avoid it.  It's done here all the time.  The only time it becomes a real issue is when the thread gets hijacked.

Took a little while, but train of thought? Okay good analogy, it had gotten off the tracks!   Sail or Sale? Sounds like...

But there is still a substantial number of people who are against gay marriage and those people are led by very vocal, bigoted organizations that mask their real intentions with a religious affiliation.  And their followers follow because it's easier to let someone else do their thinking.  When you get all your information from a single source, there will always be those who recognize this and take advantage of it.  And behind every one of these bigoted actions there is a monetary motive.

Money and Power, prime motivations since the beginning of society, but its not just Local organizations at work here, there are large National level groups that want to see the LGBT gains quashed...and many say it in the name of God one way or another.

Those anti homosexual versus in the New Testament isn't as solid as you may think. 1 Corinthians 6:9 doesn't mean homosexuals at all; the greek word alludes to someone who forces another person, through sexual coercion, into a sex trade.

Romans, Paul speaks against homosexuality, not in a sense of going against the gift of righteousness that God gives you, but because these are issues that may prevent you from focusing more on God. Paul uses the same language concerning straight marriage too "It is better not to marry but if you burn in lust then do so" (paraphrased).

Extremely important, recall the italicized words and sentences in various Bible versions? Text that wasn't found in all of the "manuscripts" edited in there by a local scribe or one higher up. The misrepresentations of important concepts and meanings, Paul's use of words being twisted to suite those who didn't want to deal there own ungodly behaviors and attitudes.

[Annah]

The good news out of all of this is that the churches who embrace LGBT are growing every year. There never has been a decline of a denomination saying "we change our minds...we think LGBT is a sin ...for the exception of the 900 CE).

Eventually, it will get to the point that the churches who condemn sexuality will be looked down upon like the churches who condemns interracial marriages.

[fionabell]

I think the church likes people to have lot's of babies. More babies means more worshipers which means more money in the collection plate and more donated land from deceased spinsters.

[justmeinoz]

Two reasons  I can think of- 
I have been doing some research and it is fairly obvious that Jesus didn't actually have much to say on the subject of sexuality at all.
Aside from the  "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" story, which some scholars think is a later accretion, there is only one sermon quoted. 
That is, that a man who lusts after the wife or betrothedof another obsessively, has already committed adultery.  I take this to mean he is looking at her a s a sex object, not a person, and disregarding her commitment to another. 
All the other references to sexuality in the New Testament come from Paul and others. 
I have to ask, who is more important Jesus or his later followers?  I would guess that  Jesus didn't think that these questions were of any great import.  He was more concerned with people living by the two Commandments he gave.

If those busy quoting scripture stopped to listen to themselves, if I am right, they are committing blasphemy, by making Paul et al, greater than Jesus ( who, remember, is God).  hopefully if they keep ranting no one will catch them out, and they will not have to deal with being exposed.

Secondly,  the Churches seem to insist that a marriage has to be consummated in an act of heterosexual penetrative intercourse, which reduces the woman to an object to be possessed.  Any marriage definition which differs, reduces the power of the patriarchal institutions over their female members, by indicating that men are not superior to women , by divine right. 

Hope that is not too obtuse, I could probably rave on for pages.

Karen.

[Julie Marie]

Great points Karen but you're missing the only point that is important to those who quote the Bible out of context - that "since the bible is god's word and the bible says this... then you have to do what I say or you are a sinner."  Oh, and one other thing, "as long as I can find something in the bible that supports my beliefs, I am always right."

So, since they somehow managed to take words from the bible, interpret them to support their prejudice against same sex marriage, then "god says gay marriage is an abomination."  End of story.

[cindianna_jones]

I tell people that if they force gay and lesbian people into marraige, that one day they won't be able to handle it anymore and will leave the family. It's a crushing blow to the spouse, children, and other close family members. Keeping LGBT people out of marriages that they don't want prevents all kinds of misery.  I often advise them to watch Broke Back Mountain to get what I'm talking about. I doubt that any of them do, but it is a marvelous film that demonstrates just what the religious people don't want to talk about. LGBT people forced into "traditional" marraiges will typically destroy their families sometime down the road.

I know from personal experience. It's been over twenty years for me since my transition, and I'm still dealing with family members. The religious BS will NEVER end.

Cindi

Oh... and if you ever get into a scripture argument with someone... just show them how the "Lord's Prayer" has changed since the oldest records in Aramaic .... yeah Arab. Look it up on the web. It is absolutely fascinating how this basic tenet of Christianity has changed SO MUCH over the years. Everything else has as well.  Go figure. Duh.

[Constance]

The senior pastor at my church is a married out-of-the-closet lesbian. Oh, so is the associate pastor, too.

Don't believe me? Come on over to San Mateo, CA, on a Sunday and I'll introduce you to them.

Churches in general are not against gay marriage. No. There are those churches that are, true. But not all churches are.

Okay, so I realized my post might not have been very clear.

Of the two couples I describe above, all parties involved are lesbian. Both the senior and associate pastors at my church are lesbians who are married to lesbians.

And, for the record, all four lesbians seem to be quite happy with these marriages. Oh, they're parents, too.

[Julie Marie]

Okay, so I realized my post might not have been very clear.

Of the two couples I describe above, all parties involved are lesbian. Both the senior and associate pastors at my church are lesbians who are married to lesbians.

And, for the record, all four lesbians seem to be quite happy with these marriages. Oh, they're parents, too.

So I'm guessing your church is either Catholic, Mormon or Evangelical, right? 

[Constance]

So I'm guessing your church is either Catholic, Mormon or Evangelical, right? 

Right, not even close.

[Annah]

Oh... and if you ever get into a scripture argument with someone... just show them how the "Lord's Prayer" has changed since the oldest records in Aramaic .... yeah Arab. Look it up on the web. It is absolutely fascinating how this basic tenet of Christianity has changed SO MUCH over the years. Everything else has as well.  Go figure. Duh.

Sorry, I have to add something. Aramaic is a completely different language to Arabic. Matter of fact, the Hebrew language shares more similarities to Arabic than Aramaic does. Even one of the most stated word is different. "God" in Aramaic is Elah and "God" in Arabic is "Allah."

Arabic stemmed from the Hebrew as well as Aramaic stemmed from the Hebrew. Both Aramaic and Arabic are daughter languages of Hebrew. There are thousands of literary differences when compared to Arabic and Aramaic. Even the verb formations are different.

Also, the Lord's Prayer isn't much different in Aramaic as it is in Koine Greek and in English (I can translate Aramaic). In Aramaic, a transliteration of the Lord's Prayer is:

Our heavenly Father, hallowed is your name.
Your Kingdom is come. Your will is done,
As in heaven so also on earth.
Give us the bread for our daily need.
And leave us serene,
just as we also allowed others serenity.
And do not pass us through trial,
except separate us from the evil one.
For yours is the Kingdom,
the Power and the Glory
To the end of the universe, of all the universes." Amen!

The only deviation is the word "serene" which is translated to forgiveness. This is where Koine Greek states "and forgive us of our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us.

So arguing the changes of the Lord's Prayer will not help your case much. However, you could argue to them to recite it because many fundamentalist Christians do not even know it to the point where they can recite it.

[Anatta]

Kia Ora,

Slightly off topic but what the heck.......................

Have you heard of MOM =Mixed Orientation Marriages, they're quite common, [I'm sure many churches know of it and turn a blind eye]...It's where a lesbian and gay man go through a 'Marriage Of Convenience' to keep up the 'appearance' of a 'normal' married couple, but have sexual relationships with same sex partners who could also be in a similar MOC, and they are just seen as 'close' friends[very close so it would seem] ...

The couples keep 'MOM' about their private life [and by the looks of things so does the church ]!

Metta Zenda

[justmeinoz]

Kia Ora Zenda.   
What we have then is people lying in the sacrament of marriage, if it's a church wedding, rather than being honest.

[titsup]

it's no reason really. they use the bible as a manual for life, and that's most of it.

yes that is a possibility

[titsup]

Kia Ora Zenda.   
What we have then is people lying in the sacrament of marriage, if it's a church wedding, rather than being honest.

maybe that is correct way to look at it

[titsup]

Two reasons  I can think of- 
I have been doing some research and it is fairly obvious that Jesus didn't actually have much to say on the subject of sexuality at all.
Aside from the  "let he who has not sinned cast the first stone" story, which some scholars think is a later accretion, there is only one sermon quoted. 
That is, that a man who lusts after the wife or betrothedof another obsessively, has already committed adultery.  I take this to mean he is looking at her a s a sex object, not a person, and disregarding her commitment to another. 
All the other references to sexuality in the New Testament come from Paul and others. 
I have to ask, who is more important Jesus or his later followers?  I would guess that  Jesus didn't think that these questions were of any great import.  He was more concerned with people living by the two Commandments he gave.

If those busy quoting scripture stopped to listen to themselves, if I am right, they are committing blasphemy, by making Paul et al, greater than Jesus ( who, remember, is God).  hopefully if they keep ranting no one will catch them out, and they will not have to deal with being exposed.

Secondly,  the Churches seem to insist that a marriage has to be consummated in an act of heterosexual penetrative intercourse, which reduces the woman to an object to be possessed.  Any marriage definition which differs, reduces the power of the patriarchal institutions over their female members, by indicating that men are not superior to women , by divine right. 

Hope that is not too obtuse, I could probably rave on for pages.

Karen.

that is two ok resons from my view

[titsup]

Okay, so I realized my post might not have been very clear.

Of the two couples I describe above, all parties involved are lesbian. Both the senior and associate pastors at my church are lesbians who are married to lesbians.

And, for the record, all four lesbians seem to be quite happy with these marriages. Oh, they're parents, too.

Thank you for the kind invitation