home
RSS
My Take: The Christian case for gay marriage
The author backs same-sex marriage because of his faith, not in spite of it.
May 19th, 2012
02:00 AM ET

My Take: The Christian case for gay marriage

Editor's Note: Mark Osler is a Professor of Law at the University of St. Thomas in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

By Mark Osler, Special to CNN

I am a Christian, and I am in favor of gay marriage. The reason I am for gay marriage is because of my faith.

What I see in the Bible’s accounts of Jesus and his followers is an insistence that we don’t have the moral authority to deny others the blessing of holy institutions like baptism, communion, and marriage. God, through the Holy Spirit, infuses those moments with life, and it is not ours to either give or deny to others.

A clear instruction on this comes from Simon Peter, the “rock” on whom the church is built. Peter is a captivating figure in the Christian story. Jesus plucks him out of a fishing boat to become a disciple, and time and again he represents us all in learning at the feet of Christ.

During their time together, Peter is often naïve and clueless – he is a follower, constantly learning.

After Jesus is crucified, though, a different Peter emerges, one who is forceful and bold. This is the Peter we see in the Acts of the Apostles, during a fevered debate over whether or not Gentiles should be baptized. Peter was harshly criticized for even eating a meal with those who were uncircumcised; that is, those who did not follow the commands of the Old Testament.

CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories

Peter, though, is strong in confronting those who would deny the sacrament of baptism to the Gentiles, and argues for an acceptance of believers who do not follow the circumcision rules of Leviticus (which is also where we find a condemnation of homosexuality).

His challenge is stark and stunning: Before ordering that the Gentiles be baptized Peter asks “Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”

None of us, Peter says, has the moral authority to deny baptism to those who seek it, even if they do not follow the ancient laws. It is the flooding love of the Holy Spirit, which fell over that entire crowd, sinners and saints alike, that directs otherwise.

My Take: Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality

It is not our place, it seems, to sort out who should be denied a bond with God and the Holy Spirit of the kind that we find through baptism, communion, and marriage. The water will flow where it will.

Intriguingly, this rule will apply whether we see homosexuality as a sin or not. The water is for all of us. We see the same thing at the Last Supper, as Jesus gives the bread and wine to all who are there—even to Peter, who Jesus said would deny him, and to Judas, who would betray him.

The question before us now is not whether homosexuality is a sin, but whether being gay should be a bar to baptism or communion or marriage.

Your Take: Rethinking the Bible on homosexuality

The answer is in the Bible. Peter and Jesus offer a strikingly inclusive form of love and engagement. They hold out the symbols of Gods’ love to all. How arrogant that we think it is ours to parse out stingily!

I worship at St. Stephens, an Episcopal church in Edina, Minnesota. There is a river that flows around the back and side of that church with a delightful name: Minnehaha Creek. That is where we do baptisms.

The Rector stands in the creek in his robes, the cool water coursing by his feet, and takes an infant into his arms and baptizes her with that same cool water. The congregation sits on the grassy bank and watches, a gentle army.

Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter

At the bottom of the creek, in exactly that spot, is a floor of smooth pebbles. The water rushing by has rubbed off the rough edges, bit by bit, day by day. The pebbles have been transformed by that water into something new.

I suppose that, as Peter put it, someone could try to withhold the waters of baptism there. They could try to stop the river, to keep the water from some of the stones, like a child in the gutter building a barrier against the stream.

It won’t last, though. I would say this to those who would withhold the water of baptism, the joy of worship, or the bonds of marriage: You are less strong than the water, which will flow around you, find its path, and gently erode each wall you try to erect.

The redeeming power of that creek, and of the Holy Spirit, is relentless, making us all into something better and new.

The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Mark Osler.

- CNN Belief Blog

Filed under: Christianity • Episcopal • Gay marriage • Opinion

soundoff (15,115 Responses)
  1. JOSE0311USMC

    GAY MARRIAGE ??? NO.... WHAT MAKE PEOPLE BECOME GAY ??? BEYOND ME. WHY ??????????????

    SOMETHING THAT I WILL NEVER BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND, WHY ???? THINKING ABOUT IT MAKES ME SICK.

    July 10, 2012 at 10:40 am |
    • midwest rail

      Easy solution – 1. Don't think about it.
      2. Break your caps lock key.
      3. Break your question mark key.
      4. Everyone's happy.

      July 10, 2012 at 10:43 am |
    • myweightinwords

      I will as.sume that you are straight? Why are you straight? When did you become straight?

      July 10, 2012 at 10:47 am |
  2. YeahRight

    "Our leaders have delegated their decision making position to these that cannot make a impartial decision or have much in the way of science behind them."

    More lies from Bob! LOL!

    In 1993, the National Institute of Health’ Dean Hamer illustrated that homosexuality might be inherited from the mother by her sons through a specific region of the X chromosome (Xq28). Hamer demonstrated this by noting that 33 out of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers whom he studied showed the same variation in the tip of the chromosome.

    – Hamer DH, Hu S, Magnuson VL, Hu N. and Pattatucci AML. A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science 1993; 261:320-326.

    A June 2006 Canadian study published in the journal, “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,” said that nature, instead of nurture, explains the origins of homosexuality. The study’ author, Prof. Anthony F. Bogaert, at Brock University in Ontario, explored the causes behind what is known as the fraternal birth order. The research showed a correlation between the number of biological older brothers a man has and his sexual orientation. Dividing his sample of more than 900 heterosexual and homosexual men into four groups, Bogaert examined the impact of all types of older brothers, including step and adopted siblings, and the amount of time brothers spent together while growing up.His research found that only the number of biological brothers had an impact on sexuality, regardless of whether the boys were raised together.

    – Bogaert, A.F. 2006. Biological versus nonbiological older brothers and men’s sexual orientation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103 July 11 2006.

    A study released in May 2006 by Swedish scientists demonstrates that biology plays a key role in determining a person’ sexuality. The research shows that the portion of the brain that helps regulate sexuality — the hypothalamus – reacted the exact same way in straight women and gay men when exposed to male pheromones, which are chemicals designed to provoke a behavior, such as sexual arousal. The same area of the brain only became stimulated in heterosexual men when introduced to female pheromones.

    – by Ivanka Savic article in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, (PNAS) “Brain Response To Putative Pheromones In Homosexual Men,” (Vol. 102 No. 19) May 10, 2005.

    In 2005, Dr. Brian Mustanski of the University of Illinois at Chicago published a study in the esteemed biomedical journal Human Genetics, claiming he identified three chromosomal regions linked to sexual orientation in men: 7q36, 8p12 and 10q26.

    “A Genomewide Scan of Male Sexual Orientation”, Human Genetics, Vol. 116, No. 4, pp. 272-278, 2005.

    In 2003, University of Texas psychoacoustics specialist Dennis McFadden found that when measuring the way the brain reacts to sound, lesbians fell in between heterosexual men and straight women, meaning they are exposed to higher than normal levels of male hormone in utero.

    – Loehlin, John C.; McFadden, David. “Otoacoustic emissions, auditory evoked potentials, and traits related to sex and sexual orientation”. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 1 April 2003.

    In 2003, University of Liverpool biologist John T. Manning found that the lesbians whom he studied have a hand pattern that resembles a man’ more than a straight female’. Manning concluded from his study that this “tells us that female homosexuals have had higher levels of exposure to testosterone before birth.”

    – Neave, N., Laing, S., Fink, B., Manning, J.T (2003) Second to fourth digit ratio, testosterone, and perceived male dominance. Proceedings of the Royal Society B (Lond), 270, 2167-2172.

    A 1991 study by Dr. Simon LeVay found that a specific region of the hypothalamus is twice as large in heterosexual men as it is in women or gay men. This shows the role of biology in sexual orientation.

    – Levay, Simon “A difference in hypothalamic structure between homosexual and heterosexual men” Science. 1991 Volume 253, Issue 5023, pp. 1034-1037.

    Another 1991 study by scientists Richard Pillard and John M. Baily studied homosexuality among brothers and found that 53 percent of identical twins were both gay. In adoptive brothers, 11 percent were both homosexual. Of non-twin biological siblings, 9 percent were gay. Again, this points to solid evidence that homosexuality is a matter of nature.

    – Bailey JM, Pillard RC (1991). A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 48, 1089-1096.

    July 10, 2012 at 10:38 am |
  3. YeahRight

    "The APA has small study samples and if you get down to the definition that they use to classify gays as ok you begin to laugh. The logic used is worse than a child’s and the fact that no morals enter into the decision also is disconcerting"

    LMAO Poor Bob is trying to disqualify 480,000 experts by using his own prejudice and bigoted opinion, well Duh Bob it's not just these experts the courts are also ruling in their favor. . Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    Marriage was defined by the US Supreme Court as a civil right. Recognized federal civil rights law in the United States is grounded in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. By this standard, marriage has long been established as a civil right.

    The operative constitutional text is section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. The relevant passages read as follows:

    No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

    A federal appeals court on May 31st ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it denies equal rights for legally married same-sex couples, making it likely that the Supreme Court will consider the politically divisive issue for the first time in its next term. This most likely will be decided in the courts and since most courts keep ruling in gays favor they should be able to over turn all the unconstitutional laws prejudice bigots have been trying to pass.

    July 10, 2012 at 10:37 am |
  4. Bob

    So far every study the gays use to cite the argument against gay marriage when using those standards and applying them to the studies for gay marriage those studies would fail every time. The APA has small study samples and if you get down to the definition that they use to classify gays as ok you begin to laugh. The logic used is worse than a child’s and the fact that no morals enter into the decision also is disconcerting. It was much emotion went into one phyc making the decision and after that how to justify it. This is about it in the declassifying gays off the DSM. In fact when you start looking into the APA you have to know that this agency is in trouble. But this is the defining agency for many hence the gay argument that all these professionals say gays are ok. It’s like domino's when one falls they all fall. They have virtually no credibility and although there are some members with a good head on their shoulders there are real problems defining the motives and definitions that are put into the DSM. I really wonder how a organization that wields the power to tell us what is deviant or not deals with the internal struggles that even in a family would be classified as dysfunctional at best. These organizations should be cut off from defining public policy and the courts should be restricted in allowing their testimony, bias and words to define the courts decision. But these are the guys that determine public policy and that is really scary and wrong. Our leaders have delegated their decision making position to these that cannot make a impartial decision or have much in the way of science behind them. The gays are resorting to the same tactics that they did in the 70s to physically badger anyone against their position and to intimidate through verbal intimidation to get their way. Would you allow a disruptive child to make decisions for you yet this is the gay agenda. It has worked so far but I see the tide turning against these tactics and the claims that they use to justify their position. I see more and more those who know its a sham start to refute what they are doing. The knowledge of the system the gays have built up is impressive and they use it much to their advantage. If you also look into the start of the gay agenda and how it was organized and the people that started it and what they said it paints the picture that the gays don’t want you to see. We see the lies and distortion of the Bible here and if there is no respect and want to preserve the true word of God then why would you think that there was hope for honesty on their part in anything.

    July 10, 2012 at 9:20 am |
    • Who invited me?

      Bob,
      You are an idiot. You like siting the disproven studies of disgraced researchers. You have been called out time and time again because you present opinions of morons as a reason for your hate.
      Stop posting your idiocy Bob

      July 10, 2012 at 9:23 am |
    • YeahRight

      "The APA has small study samples and if you get down to the definition that they use to classify gays as ok you begin to laugh."

      More lies from Bob and this proves his poor reading comprehension skills. The APA states despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. Lesbian, gay, and bisexual relationships are normal forms of human bonding. Therefore, these mainstream organizations long ago abandoned classifications of homosexuality as a mental disorder.

      This is why Bob's opinion on gays is based on lies and extreme prejudice so just laugh at his ridiculous posts while recognizing he is no way near a true Christian with all the lies he continues spew on this thread. LMAO!

      July 10, 2012 at 10:46 am |
  5. jack h

    no gay marriage unless one is a gay man, and the other a gay woman.

    July 10, 2012 at 2:30 am |
    • midwest rail

      How clever and original. /sarcasm off

      July 10, 2012 at 6:36 am |
  6. M.SM.ANSARI

    Signs: your energy and time $ always lost. Each everything politics I am not
    Politician we politics analyzer
    Dear gentleman APR 19 2012
    Please Avoid WAR so many people suffer public
    Global economic crisis
    Climatechnge
    Many people wounded for military troops mort hen 98 000
    Each every body leaving 60 to 80 year life only
    Effected FDI investor . Thing good do good

    Economy improve three way
    No 1 free birds meaning open immigration to all country
    No 2 open business policy according global law
    No 3 all country same currency

    CNN WORLD report, in the war 6, 75,000 civilians killed, 7500 troops of USA and its allied forces killed 3 25 000 people wounded and $ 3.5 Trillion Dollar spent for the war. This spending of $ 3.5 Trillion Dollar is the main cause of action for the present economic crises prevailing all over the world.
    After winning the war against IRAQ, the United States of America’s President Mr. George W.Bush, also admitted the same fact, and he openly stated that the Intelligence agency misguided him.
    Later on, even the United Nations Organization (UNO) also certified that the IRAQ has no nuclear weapons.

    m.s.mohamed ansari

    International chamber of commerce life member
    World peace prayer society life member
    USA parliament org economic adviser

    July 10, 2012 at 2:11 am |
  7. Bob

    "The jury is still out on whether being raised by same parents disadvantages children," explains Marks. "However, the available data on which the APA draws its conclusions, derived primarily from small convenience samples, are insufficient to support a strong generalized claim either way."Of the 59 studies referenced in the APA brief, more than three-quarters were based on small, non-representative, non-random samples that did not include any minority individuals or families; nearly half lacked a hetero comparison group; and few examined outcomes that extend beyond childhood such as intergenerational poverty, educational attainment, and criminality, which are a key focus of studies on children of divorce, remarriage, and cohabitation. In other words, "A lack of high quality data leaves the most significant questions unaddressed and unanswered," concludes Marks. The study be The APA has major flaws

    July 9, 2012 at 8:51 pm |
    • tallulah13

      Bob, since you didn't state what this particular piece of rhetoric was referring to, I googled a line and found that you were referencing the Regnerus study, which has been thoroughly invalidated.

      Regnerus is facing an ethics panel because his study was deliberately and falsely skewed to provide the data he wanted. I realize that it is also skewed to what you wish to believe, however, it is based on lies. It is immoral to spread lies to further your own agenda. Decent people are honest, Bob. You are not honest, Bob.

      July 10, 2012 at 2:30 am |
    • Bob

      What I was talking about is the studies the APA used to legitimize its position on gays and marriage. They were faulty small and deceptive that is the APA study. The Regenraize study while everyone here said it’s faulty and under review I have not found one article to verify that position. There have been critics of the study but for the most part no one has challenged it. I will say this though that some have taken the research and is going through it again to see if the conclusions are valid. But we all know it took time money to do this study and although all the gays and the APA have a problem with it it still stands. The post above is showing how the practices and studies the APA used to legitimize gay marriage were in themselves faulty small and not up to standards and this is the problem with the APA as I stated before. There are no newer studies to confirm gay marriage because the agenda makes it a nightmare for anyone that goes against their position. As witnessed the Regenaze study. So who would want to find the truth. So what we have is public policy being made on a lie and declared truth by the very people that would benefit the most.

      July 10, 2012 at 8:06 am |
    • William

      "The Regenraize study while everyone here said it’s faulty and under review"

      Dr. Regnerus’ blog shows a definite religious bias and association with groups that are less than friendly if not down right hate filled toward same sex parenting. You can not say the same thing for all the experts at the APA.

      July 10, 2012 at 10:55 am |
  8. YeahRight

    "For Christians, this is a theological argument. For others, you can have your arguments based on the tide, the APA, etc. but let's be honest when claiming religions or spiritual understanding and understanding of all things scriptural. It helps to acknowledge that your interpretation is a minority one among."

    There are thousands of gay churches, there are even gay clergy and even the Pope has stated just being gay is NOT a sin. So obviously you have no clue what you're talking about. If you look at previous posts there was an apology letter from a 100 pastors to the gay community. So before you start spewing your prejudice and bigotry you might want to do your homework. If you acknowledge what the experts have stated about gays, that it's NOT a choice, it's NOT a mental illness and it CAN'T be voluntarily changed, then your god created gay people which means you are condemning a creation of your god. Duh!

    July 9, 2012 at 6:09 pm |
    • Bob

      Sorry its not like the phycs or the APA there is no interpretations.

      July 9, 2012 at 6:58 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Bob

      I find it hilarious that you completely stopped using Mark Regnerus after it was pointed out how stupid that study was. Now if only you could see the stupidity in the rest of your posts.

      July 9, 2012 at 7:00 pm |
    • Bob

      The study is good you just don't like it, I cant blame you its pretty incriminating. I would do the same thing your doing right now, but I would urge everyone that doesn't know it to look it up there are plenty of back and forth going on with the comments as expected but the APA has a bit of a black eye from it so you know they wont be liking it. But I have plenty more so don't worry.

      July 9, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Bob

      What the hell are you talking about? The guy had a completely idiotic methodology and questions, he's currently under review, and the study has been completely discounted as useless due to him cherrypicking to confirm his own bias.
      I find it amazing that you could be this blinded Bob. Who are you gonna bring up next and trot out as some kind of authority on something? Michael Behe?

      July 9, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
    • midwest rail

      We've all seen the reliability of the " studies " and links you post, Bob. Please continue, you do the quest for equality a greater service than you can imagine.

      July 9, 2012 at 8:25 pm |
  9. James

    "It helps to acknowledge that your interpretation is a minority one among."

    The Biblical condemnation of homosexuality is based on human ignorance, suspicion of those who are different, and an overwhelming concern for ensuring the survival of the people. Since the Bible regards homosexuality as a capital crime, it clearly assumes that homosexuality is a matter of free choice, a deliberate rebellion against God. We have learned from modern science that people do not choose to be gay or straight; hence it is neither logical nor moral to condemn those whose nature it is to be gay or lesbian.

    July 9, 2012 at 6:05 pm |
  10. nathandf

    Mark Osler, next time your opinion is published, you may want to use 'Episcopal' instead of 'Christian'. You interpretation is not in the mainstream of Christian thought and interpretation.

    Your second paragraph stating that we do not have the moral authority to deny others the blessings of communion, baptism and marriage leads me to think that maybe that is God's job, agreed? At the same time we do not have the spiritual authority to go out on our own and command God to bless us because we practice or perform communion, baptism and marriage ceremonies. All of these are to be practiced within the parameters God established or there will be no blessing. As a matter of fact, the book of Corinthians warns about abusing communion with some very serious consequences.

    For Christians, this is a theological argument. For others, you can have your arguments based on the tide, the APA, etc. but let's be honest when claiming religions or spiritual understanding and understanding of all things scriptural. It helps to acknowledge that your interpretation is a minority one among.

    July 9, 2012 at 5:39 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "You interpretation is not in the mainstream of Christian thought and interpretation."

      You mean that it doesn't agree with your prejudice and bigotry of the gay community. Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

      Social science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents—concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people—are unfounded. Overall, the research indicates that the children of lesbian and gay parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in their development, adjustment, or overall well-being.

      July 9, 2012 at 6:13 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Since when is the Episcopal Church not 'mainstream'?

      July 10, 2012 at 9:25 am |
  11. Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

    What's the "agenda", Bob? Who's "using" gays and for what?

    You don't answer these questions because you are nothing more than a troll. You don't believe the tripe you write.

    July 9, 2012 at 3:11 pm |
  12. Erik

    "APA to reclassify gay activities as normal"

    It's not just the APA. All major medical professional organizations concur that sexual orientation is not a choice and cannot be changed, from gay to straight or otherwise. The American, Canadian, Australian, New Zealand, and European Psychological, Psychiatric, and Medical Associations all agree with this, as does the World Health Organization and the medical organizations of Japan, China, and most recently, Thailand. Furthermore, attempts to change one's sexual orientation can be psychologically damaging, and cause great inner turmoil and depression, especially for Christian gays and lesbians.

    The scientific evidence of the innateness of homosexuality, bisexuality, and transgenderism is overwhelming, and more peer-reviewed studies which bolster this fact are being added all the time. Science has long regarded sexual orientation – and that's all sexual orientations, including heterosexuality – as a phenotype. Simply put, a phenotype is an observable set of properties that varies among individuals and is deeply rooted in biology. For the scientific community, the role of genetics in sexuality is about as "disputable" as the role of evolution in biology.

    On the second point, that there is no conclusion that there is a "gay gene," they are right. No so-called gay gene has been found, and it's highly unlikely that one ever will. This is where conservative Christians and Muslims quickly say "See, I told you so! There's no gay gene, so being gay is a choice!"

    The fact that a so-called "gay gene" has not been discovered does not mean that homosexuality is not genetic in its causation. This is understandably something that can seem a bit strange to those who have not been educated in fields of science and advanced biology, and it is also why people who are not scientists ought not try to explain the processes in simple black-and-white terms. There is no gay gene, but there is also no "height gene" or "skin tone gene" or "left-handed gene." These, like sexuality, have a heritable aspect, but no one dominant gene is responsible for them.

    Many genes, working in sync, contribute to the phenotype and therefore do have a role in sexual orientation. In many animal model systems, for example, the precise genes involved in sexual partner selection have been identified, and their neuro-biochemical pathways have been worked out in great detail. A great number of these mechanisms have been preserved evolutionarily in humans, just as they are for every other behavioral trait we know (including heterosexuality).

    There are many biologic traits which are not specifically genetic but are biologic nonetheless. These traits are rooted in hormonal influences, contributed especially during the early stages of fetal development. This too is indisputable and based on extensive peer-reviewed research the world over. Such prenatal hormonal influences are not genetic per se, but are inborn, natural, and biologic nevertheless.

    July 9, 2012 at 2:55 pm |
  13. Jeannine

    "There is no support in the Bible for gay"

    The Scriptures were written approximately 2000 or more years ago when there was no knowledge of constitutional homosexuality. The Scripture writers believed that all people were naturally heterosexual so that they viewed homosexuality activity as unnatural. Women today are pointing out that the inferiority of women expressed in the scriptures was a product of culture and the times in which the Bible was written; it should not be followed today, now that we are beginning to appreciate the natural and God-given equality of men and women.

    Similarly, as we know that homosexuality is just as natural and God-given as heterosexuality, we realize that the Biblical injunctions against homosexuality were conditioned by the attitudes and beliefs about this form of sexual expression which were held by people without benefit of centuries of scientific knowledge and understanding.

    It is unfair of us to expect or impose a twentieth century mentality and understanding about equality of genders, races and sexual orientations on the Biblical writers. We must be able to distinguish the eternal truths the Bible is meant to convey from the cultural forms and attitudes expressed there.

    July 9, 2012 at 2:53 pm |
  14. YeahRight

    "Do you guys have any idea of who is pulling the strings for you to try to obtain gay marriage"

    It's going to be the US supreme court. Marriage was defined by the US Supreme Court as a civil right. Recognized federal civil rights law in the United States is grounded in the U.S. Constitution as interpreted by the Supreme Court. By this standard, marriage has long been established as a civil right.

    The operative constitutional text is section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, which was ratified in 1868. The relevant passages read as follows:

    No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws

    A federal appeals court on May 31st ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act is unconstitutional because it denies equal rights for legally married same-sex couples, making it likely that the Supreme Court will consider the politically divisive issue for the first time in its next term. This most likely will be decided in the courts and since most courts keep ruling in gays favor they should be able to over turn all the unconstitutional laws prejudice bigots have been trying to pass.

    Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    July 9, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
  15. Bob

    A pioneering h0m0 activist Frank Kameny celebrated by fellow h0m0 the world over and honored by big O and his adm-in says the God of the Bible is a sinful h0m0pho bigot who needs to repent of his sinful h0m0pho.He was integral in pressuring the APA to reclassify gay activities as normal,has written to a pro-family organization that he believes bestiality is fine,as long as the animal doesn't mind."Yes, and I can't help but laugh now, in this context, when I think of a physc meeting we had in Atlanta. Richard Isay, a gay physc and a leading proponent and promoter of gay intercourse, was on a panel where someone asked him about a Kinsey-like statement that Isay had made–something about nature's indifference to any form of S. The questioner asked Isay about farm boys who might be attracted to sheep. Would he encourage these boys to have s with sheep? With a straight face, Isay said this was entirely acceptable, "as long as the erotic attraction was satisfying to both the boy and the ewe." Here was the leading spokesman for the gay caucus at the A.P.A., giving a rationale for bestiality.

    July 9, 2012 at 2:50 pm |
    • Who invited me?

      Bob
      You are a moron.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Given the fact that you typed this up yourself (hence the idiotic "physc" that appears in all your posts) you composed the entire thing. Post the link, Bob.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:53 pm |
    • Bob

      Hey you guys are real deceivers and very good at it no wonder the agenda has made it this far on nothing

      July 9, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
    • YeahRight

      Bob's getting his junk science from NARTH. Every major American medical authority has concluded that there is no scientific support for NARTH’s view, and many have expressed concern that reparative therapy can cause harm. Most strikingly, in 2006, the American Psychological Association (APA) stated: “There is simply no sufficiently scientifically sound evidence that sexual orientation can be changed.” The APA added, “Our further concern is that the positions espoused by NARTH and Focus on the Family create an environment in which prejudice and discrimination can flourish.

      July 9, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      I thought you were going to post the link "when you had time", Bob. Obviously, you've had time, as you're still here, beating off. Where's the link, you little coward?

      July 9, 2012 at 3:08 pm |
  16. YeahRight

    "APA H is normal thats the weakest deflections I have ever heard and the poorest one for gay marriage"

    Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    Social science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents—concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people—are unfounded. Overall, the research indicates that the children of lesbian and gay parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in their development, adjustment, or overall well-being.

    July 9, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
  17. Bob

    Normal to the APA is the same as bestiality if the animal and you dont have a problem with it then its ok; So to the APA H is normal thats the weakest deflections I have ever heard and the poorest one for gay marriage

    July 9, 2012 at 1:53 pm |
    • Primewonk

      Except, of course, that this is yet another of Bob's lies.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Bob

      You said, "Normal to the APA is the same as bestiality if the animal and you dont have a problem with it then its ok;"
      Animals can't give informed consent. Bestiality is animal abuse. You have to be off-the-chart stupid to equate homosexuality with bestiality. Are you off-the-chart stupid, Bob?

      I have a better analogy for you. Because children also can't give informed consent, indoctrinating them into religion is far more like bestiality than homosexuality ever will be.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:20 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "Normal to the APA is the same as bestiality"

      Since we all know you're lying put the exact web link to APA's website where it states this. LMAO! The people that are informed on this subject know that animals can't consent. Duh!

      July 9, 2012 at 2:42 pm |
    • Bob

      LINCa if you look at my previous posts you will see that the Physc of the APA spoke the bestiality issue out of his own mouth Along with one of the founders of the gay agenda Like I said, not my words, I will be more than happy to repost it when I get time.I can also provide the link that fully tells the story. As for the children the Bible says that each is assigned their own angel and that angel is constantly in the throne room of God in front of God. If you would know your Bible better you would know this and He makes provisions even for gays.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      You won't post it.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • LinCA

      @Bob

      You said, "LINCa if you look at my previous posts you will see that the Physc of the APA spoke the bestiality issue out of his own mouth Along with one of the founders of the gay agenda"
      It's irrelevant who said it. Anyone who equates homosexuality with bestiality as you imply is a fucking moron.

      I strongly suspect that the APA says that the drive behind all forms of sexuality are innate. That doesn't make all forms equal. Any form where any of the participants can't consent is abuse. Any sex with animals, children or anyone not able to provide consent, should be, and in most cases is, illegal.

      You said, "Like I said, not my words, I will be more than happy to repost it when I get time.I can also provide the link that fully tells the story."
      Do that. And while you are at it, make sure to read it for comprehension.

      You said, "As for the children the Bible says that each is assigned their own angel and that angel is constantly in the throne room of God in front of God. If you would know your Bible better you would know this and He makes provisions even for gays."
      I know my bible well enough to know that it contains very little of value. Basing your life on fairy tales isn't the smartest move you could make.

      What the bible says is completely irrelevant in a secular society. While you are free to live your life according to that nonsense, it doesn't apply to anyone else.

      July 9, 2012 at 3:33 pm |
  18. Melvin

    "Neither gay or gay marriage is normal. There is no support in the Bible for gays"

    The Scriptures at no point deal with homosexuality as an authentic sexual orientation, a given condition of being. The remarkably few Scriptural references to "homosexuality" deal rather with homosexual acts, not with homosexual orientation. Those acts are labeled as wrong out of the context of the times in which the writers wrote and perceived those acts to be either nonmasculine, idolatrous, exploitative, or pagan. The kind of relationships between two consenting adults of the same sex demonstrably abounding among us - relationships that are responsible and mutual, affirming and fulfilling - are not dealt with in the Scriptures.

    July 9, 2012 at 1:12 pm |
  19. YeahRight

    "The APA made statement of bio factors to h0m0,but since have updated their claims. In their newer claim the APA admits that they have not found a bio basis for h0m0."

    LMAO they're the ones stating it NORMAL, moron. "Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation." Thanks for showing the world you have really bad reading comprehension skills. LMAO!

    Heterosexual behavior and homosexual behavior are normal aspects of human sexuality. Despite the persistence of stereotypes that portray lesbian, gay, and bisexual people as disturbed, several decades of research and clinical experience have led all mainstream medical and mental health organizations in this country to conclude that these orientations represent normal forms of human experience. The American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Counseling Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American School Counselor Association, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Association of SocialWorkers, together representing more than 480,000 mental health professionals, have all taken the position that homosexuality is not a mental disorder and thus is not something that needs to or can be “cured."

    July 9, 2012 at 1:11 pm |
    • Bob

      I guess according to the APA you guys are equivalent with bestiality and peds I think that you would want to distance yourself from these descriptions. In the previous posts I have not stated my own opinion these are the ones you quoted as having the last word on gays they are the authorities not me. As for the time frame of the studies some are 08 that should be good enough and even one is released just this year. Do you guys have any idea of who is pulling the strings for you to try to obtain gay marriage or are you so blinded that you dont want to know that you are being used?

      July 9, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Being used for what? By whom? What big conspiracy are you imagining, Bob?

      I know you won't bother to answer. It's just another red herring.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:22 pm |
    • YeahRight

      "I guess according to the APA you guys are equivalent with bestiality and peds I think that you would want to distance yourself from these descriptions."

      With all the lies you've spewed on this thread one thing for sure is you're not a christian but just another homophobic bigot.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • Willa

      I think Bob may have mental problems. His posts definitely read like those of a paranoid schizophrenic. I am not saying this to put Bob down- merely an observation. Arguing with the mentally handicapped is a waste of time.

      July 9, 2012 at 11:41 pm |
  20. YeahRight

    "In a historic study of children raised by h0m0 parents, sociolot Mark Regnerus of Texas at Austin has overturned the conventional acade wisdom that such children suffer no disadvantages when compared to children raised by their married mother and father"

    There are hundred of thousands of experts that have proven this statement wrong. Which is why gays are now allowed to adopt nationwide.

    Social science has shown that the concerns often raised about children of lesbian and gay parents—concerns that are generally grounded in prejudice against and stereotypes about gay people—are unfounded. Overall, the research indicates that the children of lesbian and gay parents do not differ from the children of heterosexual parents in their development, adjustment, or overall well-being.

    July 9, 2012 at 1:07 pm |
    • Bob

      They may take exception with a few minor points but no one has done as extensive a study as this and that is the problem they cant refute it.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:18 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Bob

      That study has been tossed out, due to him lying about who he interviewed (and he admitted as such, yet still published anyway), and he's even in the middle of a Scientific Misconduct Inquiry. He was probablt the worst person you could have brought up, or did you just think no one would bother to look up the study and to see if there were any problems with it. Not only an invalid sampling, but also leading the evidence to his bigoted conclusion, I hope this guy never gets a job again.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:27 pm |
    • Tom, Tom, the Piper's Son

      Do you EVER get anything right, you donkey? This is from Discovery:

      Strong criticism

      But other scientists say the research is deeply flawed, and does not measure the effect of same-s3x parenting at all. The study defined same-s3x parenting by asking participants if their parents had ever had same-s3x relationships, and whether they had lived with the parent at that time. That led to a "hodgepodge" group of people who Regnerus then compared with kids in stable, married homes, said Judith Stacey, a sociologist at New York University who was not involved in the research.

      "He doesn't have an actual category of gay parents in the project that you can isolate and say the most important thing in this kid's childhood is that they were raised by gay parents," Stacey told LiveScience. "These are kids whose parents, maybe they divorced, maybe they separated, maybe they had a scandalous affair, we just don't know."
      In contrast, a fair comparison would have matched up children of same-s3x parents with children of heteros3xual parents who looked otherwise similar — no extra divorces, no extra separations, no extra time in foster care for the kids, said Gary Gates, a researcher at the Williams Inst itute, a s3xual orientation policy think tank at the University of California, Los Angeles.

      July 9, 2012 at 2:33 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.