Our mutual joy the religious case for gay marriage

Opponents of gay marriage often cite Scripture. But what the Bible teaches about love argues for the other side. The great Bible scholar Walter Brueggemann, emeritus professor at Columbia Theological Seminary, quotes the apostle Paul when he looks for biblical support of gay marriage: “There is neither Greek nor Jew, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ.”.

In a religious marriage, two people promise to take care of each other, profoundly, the way they believe God cares for them. Biblical literalists will disagree, but the Bible is a living document, powerful for more than 2, years because its truths speak to us even as we change through history. Lisa Miller, a senior editor at Newsweek who oversees all the mag’s religion reporting (and does a great job at it) has a cover story, posted online today, on what the Bible says (and may.

Would any contemporary heterosexual married couple—who likely woke up on their wedding day harboring some optimistic and newfangled ideas about gender equality and romantic love—turn to the Bible as a how-to script? Of course not, yet the religious opponents of gay marriage would have it be so. For more: Queen Esther is married to a non-Jew and, according to legend, saves the Jewish people.

Basically the couple moved in together, and if they cohabited long enough, they were married, legally. Copy Link.

California’s Proposition 8 | Reasoning Through the Rhetoric of Same-Sex Marriage | vialogue

I am fully supportive of equal rights. In addition to its praise of friendship and its condemnation of divorce, the Bible gives many examples of marriages that defy convention yet benefit the greater community. David rends his clothes at Jonathan's death and, in grieving, writes a song:. Gay men like to point to the story of passionate King David and his friend Jonathan, with whom he was "one spirit" and whom he "loved as he loved himself.

Leave a comment Cancel reply. Post a Comment. What happens in the bedroom, really, has nothing to do with any of this. The alleged analogy is wrongheaded for two main reasons. The lone voice that she cites against homosexual practice is not from a scholar but from a certain Rev. Obviously it has to be read with the realizations that it ours mutual joys the religious case for gay marriage of multiple genres i. In fact, it calls into the very argument itself how that idea ought to inform this very issue.

We want our children to grow up in stable homes. So it makes no sense to formulate a moral argument based on an absence of choice as regards the mere experience of an impulse. Concluding Thoughts. Here is my explanation as to why we should regard the prohibition of homosexual practice in Leviticus with great seriousness notice that I use a combination of criteria.

I sincerely hope we are reaching that understanding together. The arguments for marriage between one man and one woman is NOT the same as wishing that homosexuals were wiped from the face of the planet, or that they were locked up in a room somewhere to cease to exist. The Bible was written for a world so unlike our own, it's impossible to apply its rules, at face value, to ours. Solon, Thanks for your pointed questions.

Religious wedding ceremonies have already changed to reflect new conceptions of marriage. This goes back to to the first definition I mentioned. The New Testament model of marriage is hardly better. In a religious marriage, two people promise to take care of each other, profoundly, the way they believe God cares for them. Religious proponents of gay marriage routinely ignore or twist the major arguments in Scripture and philosophy against homosexual practice.

But since you asked… I suppose I would suggest that it is possible to have an arrangement of compromise that is both civilly just, and religiously respectful. It is clear that, ultimately, Miller and Meacham have little desire to make responsible arguments about the merits of moral appeals to Scripture their refusal to consider any major argument against their position is evidence enough of this. Polyamory by definition is inclusive it allows more than one other partner to join the union.

Continue being a beacon of hope and a guide to the future within our Church!