Thursday, November 12, 2009

Same sex marriage - yes or no?!

Mormon general authority and modern day apostle, Dallin H. Oaks, speaks on religious freedom and civil rights and explains how they are connected rather than being in opposition to each other.

Never EVER did I hear a better explanation of this subject. I strongly encourage you to listen to this public speech recently given at BYU Idaho (especially the latter half).

Also, I suggest we speak up for this important matter: The basic right for everyone, religious people included, to voice any opinion they may have in important matters of society.


  1. Yes, ofcourse same sex marriage and love is just as natural. It is only the narrow mind of a human being that would expell or exclude any other from their surrounding, usually due to religion or lack of understanding anothers view. God is pure love and understanding. Many human beings fail to love and understand... this is the core kernel of this issue.

    I was myself expelled from a religion due to my choice of love. My wife and I met in that church. It is the best choice I have and will ever make, regardless other peoples opinion. I have found true love and happiness, keep in mind I was married to a religious man before.

    This time it is the real pure love still going strong and alive after 11 years. And it is a same sex marriage...! And I know God is with us. :-)

  2. You're missing the point though: The principle I'm highlighting is merely "the right to have an opinion" about this as well as ANY other matter! ;-)

    There's a difference between asking: "Am I right or am I right" and "am I right or am I wrong". See what I'm saying?

    Also, there's a slight hint in the way your comment is phrased that eXactly illustrates what I'm after. Should I, or you, for that matter, be ridiculed for having an opinion about this?

  3. The right to have an opinion includes the right to think ideas are ridiculous. However there is an important difference between attacking an idea, and attacking a person for having and voicing the idea.

    However, quite often a person will be strongly attached to an idea, and feel that attacking an idea is an attack on the person believing in the idea as well. This is too common when it comes to religion. You've all heard religious people claiming that people should respect (their) religion.

    But religion is no more than an idea, and no more inherently worthy than ideas that goes against that religion.

    When it comes to safe sex marriage appealing to what is or is not "normal" is not a good argument, because you cannot draw a conclusion from "what is" to "what ought to be". "What ought to be" is purely a subjective ethical stand. It is what you believe is right, either directly through your own evaluation, or indirectly through the religion you chose to believe in.

    So everyone has the right to believe what they do, and voice it without fear of being punished. But that does not include the right to not have their ideas criticized.

  4. OK, here's an "opinion" for you. I think that taking showers without underwear should be illegal. I take personal offense in knowing that you and others are taking showers without wearing underwear. I know it's not really none of my business, but hey, we live in a democracy, right...? Beside there are so many options today, like speedos and such, there should be no reasons why people would be attracted to this discusting routine of taking showers without clothes on. It's a sin in my religious beliefe system...

  5. Hey anonymmous ;)

    Great input! I'm thinking you were just about to make a good argument in this discussion, but the punch line was kind of missing... or not? Could you please add just a few more comments, so we fully understand what you're trying to say? (This is getting interesting!)

  6. My point was that "democracy" has no place in deciding things that is of no concerns to others. If 51% of the people in Iceland thinks that Christianity is a sin, it would still be wrong to make being a Christian illegal in Iceland. Just like it is of nobodies business but yours whether or not you use speedos in your shower, it's not up to anyone but me to decide if I want to use my left foot first every time I go through a door, and it's nobodies business but mine what people and what sexes they are the ones I choose to love.

    Democracy is "for the rest", meaning the stuff that "affect others". Not for the stuff that doesn't concern anybody but me and myself...

    40 years ago Samî people would be sterilized in Norway, against their will and even sometimes without their *knowing*, 60 years ago Jews would be killed in Germany, today homosexuals are denied basic human rights like to get legalized marriages in most of the world. People falsely believe that it's because of prejudice and dictatorship, while fact is that it is because of that "the majority" wanted to decide "what is right and good - 'also for others'"...

    1690 years ago being a Christian was associated with a death sentence in Europe. 60 years ago being a Jew would mean death, 40 years ago being gay was illegal, today it's equivalent to 20 times as large a suicide rate because of prejudice, mostly being spread among Christians who themselves used to be bonfires all over Europe about 1.5 Millenniums ago...

    Many things we *think* is of our business is of *none others business than those it concerns*...

    Homosexuality is *definitely* one of those...

    How's that for a punch line...? ;)

  7. That's an eXcellent punch line ;-) Thank you for making it so clear!

    Here's what I'm thinking:

    People can try to be as objective as ever on matters such as these (and so far I've been, too, in this particular online dialog). However, in the end of the day, when everything is said and done, we'll end up or return back to faith, religious questions and standpoints.

    Here's how I see it, and I'll try to be as straightforward as I can - beginning with the most difficult statement right away (know that statement on a stand-alone basis may seem ignorant):

    Yes, I believe in God and I believe he has clearly spoken on the subject of same sex marriage. Unlike many other Christians of today, I believe God as a supreme, perfect and all-knowing Father in heaven knows what's best for us and that ultimately we're not in a position to dictate neither his authority nor his commandments. Especially not by counting who's for and who's against.

    Whenever society does try to alter eternal law and become a law unto itself, we're taking small but active steps away from our own good. I believe society heavily depends on the basic family structure.

    This does not mean that we don't love and care for each other. On the contrary! The entire subject here IS about love.

    In my experience, a change in judicial law, however, regarding same sex marriage will affect long term freedom i.e. tolerance for basic family values. Here's an example of the reason for it - "The tyranny of tolerance":

    (You really need to watch this one, because Elder Bednar is saying eXactly what I'm trying to explain.)

    I'd also like to add: I perfectly know that I'm speaking about a VERY complex subject and that I in no way am an expert on homosexual issues and related matters. For this reason alone I deeply sense the sensitive nature of this discussion and I apologize for not being able to always express every thought without bias and prejudice.

    Of course I'm imperfect in every respect. However, discussions like these sharpen my mind and challenge me to rethink every aspect of this important subject! Thank you for reading all of this, and not only the first paragraph of my comment.

  8. Thank you for reading mine too, although certainly missing the main point in it. Let me clarify;

    * Even though *I* think your religion is a delusion and a disease, and that you'd be better of "healed from this delusion", it's none of my business since your religion is *YOUR BUSINESS*...

    * Even though *YOU* think Homosexuality or a disease and a "sin against God" - or any combination of it, it's *NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS* since other people's sexual preferences are *THOSE OTHER PEOPLE'S BUSINESS*...

    The day we learn to appreciate that we're different and tolerate eachother's differences are the day war stops and empathy can reach levels where starvation, hunger and suffering can disappear. Not too different from your beliefe in the "Second Coming" I assume. Maybe that's what was really meant in fact by "Second Coming", who knows...?

    But before such levels of tolerance can be reached, the same rights for differences are definitely a pre-requisite, like for instance the right to have a legal marriage between those 15% that doesn't agree with your idea of sexual preferences...

    Maybe that's what your guy really is waiting for before he shows up again...? Who knows...?

  9. PS!
    I saw your video, and afterwards I saw this one;