An argument in favor of homosexual rights

In the last example, the State Attorney General has unilaterally announced she will not uphold the state constitution. To wit, here are some reasons we should support same-sex marriage: In any difference of opinion, both sides believe in the certainty of their cause. In history, opposing armies may win and lose many battles but there are examples of wars that have gone on for decades or even centuries.

An argument in favor of homosexual rights

February 2, Recently, I have been having some good conversations with many in the gay rights movement. My friends in the LGBTQ community and their advocates often attempt to argue that homosexuality and biblical Christianity are perfectly compatible.

This tactic should not be employed as it ultimately fails for several reasons referencing the New Testament alone. First, Jesus made many commands, and in Matthew William Lane Craig responds: For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and the two shall become one flesh.

In a nutshell, Jesus says that marriage is between one man, and one woman, becoming one flesh for one lifetime. One might attempt to argue that Jesus never explicitly spoke against homosexuality, and who cares what Paul says?

However, in the New Testament, Luke wrote not only the Gospel of Luke, but also the continuation of that book in Acts.

Jesus is God in the flesh and would, therefore, know all things in his resurrected state. If objective moral values and duties do not exist, then there is nothing objectively wrong with homosexual behavior.

This seems to be a huge victory for the gay rights movement because if atheism is true there are no logical grounds to condemn their actions as objectively wrong because all we would be left with is our subjective opinions. Because if God does not exist, not only are objective moral values and duties annihilated, but so are objective human rights.

It Violates Natural Law

If God goes out the window, objective morality and human rights follow along with Him. It logically follows, then, that we lose all grounds to affirm objective human value, and also the ability to choose otherwise. If we cannot make genuine choices, this would also include choices with moral properties.

Therefore, objective morality and value both go down the drain in an atheistic worldview. If this is the case, we can logically affirm that all mankind is genuinely created equal and we ought to be treated equally. Moreover, if there is nothing objectively wrong with homosexual acts, there is also nothing objectively wrong with persecuting homosexuals and being intolerant of the LGBTQ community in general.

We must keep our logical grounds of objective morality or nothing is objectively good, bad, right, wrong, fair, or evil.

If atheism is true, the acts of Mother Teresa and Ted Bundy are morally equivalent and neutral in an objective sense. If there is nothing really wrong with anything, then there is nothing really objectively wrong with the beating, torture, and murder of Matthew Shepard because he was gay. If we sincerely care about equal human rights, we must not abandon the objective grounding of these rights.

Only if God exists do objective moral values, duties, and rights make any sense. I would sincerely like to help my gay friends and neighbors out and provide them with an argument that is not only logically consistent but also affirms their objective human rights.

And SCOTUS is an argument in favor of homosexual rights about to decide a different case (Masterpiece Cakeshop. every state criminalized homosexual sex. and it provides brief explanations This is really interesting from a legal perspective. In many arguments about rights there is a balancing act between the rights of different groups (ex. a racist shopkeeper versus a black patron), but marriage equality is most certainly not one of these issues. Giving equal marriage rights to gay individuals has absolutely no effect on the marriages of other people. Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the s. This is false. First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities.

At first glance they might think this is crazy because many feel that conservative Christianity is the enemy of the LGBTQ community. However, we must remember that given Christian theism, we have grounds for the intrinsic value of all humans created in the image of God, and we have logical grounds for objective moral values and duties.

Again, these are glaringly absent on atheism. However, after making this point, they should state that they freely choose to ignore these objective moral values and duties, and that they freely choose to sin.

By the way, they should point out that anyone heterosexual or otherwisewho is committed to a sexual lifestyle apart from the biblical model of marriage is just as objectively sinful as they are that would be the vast majority of American college students!

An argument in favor of homosexual rights

My gay neighbor should point out that anyone committed to viewing internet porn is just as objectively wrong as they are. Anyone who does not hate his or her sin, and committed to fighting against it, is figuratively spitting in the face of Christ.

With that in mind, the mark of a true Christian is one who hates their sin, not one who parades and flaunts it. As a loving warning, this is a very dangerous place to be. At this point, the gay rights advocate should make this move and state: Just as we do not typically persecute the heterosexual college students who engage in sexual activity before marriage, we ought not to oppress or torment the practicing homosexual.

Jesus taught to love everyone from our neighbors Mark Speak the truth in love, and as always….Debates over gay marriage involve both legal and social arguments, for and against.

Legal arguments on behalf of gay marriage tend to get more attention because it should be a . The corollary of this argument is that heterosexuals have no right to lecture homosexuals about marriage because so many marriages already end in failure.

However, this is a great example of the tu quoque fallacy, because as it happens, same-sex couples are much .

Recent Opinions

Homosexual couples on the other hand will inevitably have many of the same strengths and weaknesses in common. Instead of making them stronger together, the redefinition of marriage will only amplify their weaknesses, just as it reveals the weakness of the logic behind their arguments. And SCOTUS is an argument in favor of homosexual rights about to decide a different case (Masterpiece Cakeshop.

every state criminalized homosexual sex. and it provides brief explanations This is really interesting from a legal perspective. 3.

Debunking 5 Common Arguments for Homosexuality — Charisma News

ALL RIGHTS HAVE LIMITS. It makes no sense to talk about equal rights in this context. If that were the case, polygamous or incestuous marriages would have to be legalized too. There are always limits to rights. Legalization would be another step towards the mainstreaming of homosexuality in society.

A Biblical Argument for Gay Rights. Tim. Stratton (The FreeThinking Theist) | February 2, Recently, I have been having some good conversations with many in the gay rights movement. 7- Therefore, the Law of Christ (teachings of Jesus) is clear that homosexual acts .

An argument in favor of homosexual rights