A Letter From A Cousin
One of my cousins felt compelled to write me after I got married and tell me what his understanding of the Catholic Church’s position on gay marriage is. I found it considerably offensive even though it was couched in the language of “Christian love.” I took his name out to protect the not-so-innocent. His letter follows after the jump:
October 14, 2008
Dear Nick,
I know that your union took place a few weeks ago. Over the period of time since I received your invitation, I have felt compelled to write to you. It’s not a palpable thing to try and support someone while at the same time not condoning his or her actions. So I will state my beliefs and hopefully you will understand.
To begin with I think everyone who has physically moved on from the Genoa/Toledo area has not just moved on in the physical sense, but also in who we are. The values we received in our youths from our parents, aunts and uncles, and grandparents have been manipulated and reshaped by the experience of higher education, time spent making a living, and living our lives. In some ways those original values and beliefs have matured and grown, and some have diminished or been replaced. By the same token our faith beliefs have changed, and some have grown deeper and some have been let go. As we mature and begin to contemplate our own mortality, the strength of our faith changes, much like the ebb and flow of our life, as we move in our faith journey with God.
About six years ago I went through an experience that resulted in a faith filled epiphany in my relationship with the Lord, and even though the low points still occur in my life, I feel I always have the Lord on my side. I have also learned just how ignorant to the faith I was, and more importantly how sinful I was as a person. This caused me to change my life. Not drastic changes mind you, but changes just the same. Some were little things, like lending a helping hand, going out of my way to help others expecting nothing back in return, sharing my faith with others, and being involved in various church committees, being a Eucharist minister, being a sponsor for the Right of Christian Initiation into the Catholic Church, and partaking in two faith based mens’ groups (including an accountability/discipleship group that meets weekly, and attending Mass twice a week. This is all in an effort to live my faith through actions to show my love of God, and to be the best version of myself, not only for the benefit of myself but for those I come in contact. One could say that although I thought I could bend or change God’s message, in fact his message has changed me.
One of the sinful acts I was not aware of was sexual relations outside of marriage. For whatever reason in my own naivete or just refusing to believe it a sin, I figured as long as you were not married you could have sex with whomever you chose, and if you were married, if you had sex with someone other than your spouse then it was a sin. Well, as convenient as this mindset was, it did not follow God’s teachings and certainly didn’t follow Church law regarding the Sacrament of Marriage. My faith, based on Church teaching in regard to any sexual act with another person is unholy and sinful if it is outside of the Sacrament of Marriage (whether you and the other person are unmarried or not).
I also believe the Church’s teaching that the Sacrament of Marriage is entered into by two heterosexual people, with the first and primary reason for the union is to bear children. Therefore, unlike the State of California’s judiciary branch, I do not believe a union between two same sex people constitutes a sacramental marriage, which is the only marriage that in my faith I can recognize. If a marriage is not before God, then it is not a marriage. This is my belief.
I don’t believe that being a gay man in and of itself is sinful, just as I believe that people do not choose to be gay. I believe that the homosexual’s mind and a heterosexual’s mind are just different. Not right or wrong, just different. The interesting thing is what you do to act upon your sexual orientation. A gay man would be committing a sin by having a sexual relationship with another man, or woman, whether he is recognized as being “married” in the State of California or not. A gay man, who maintains his sexual abstinence, can be a righteous man in the eyes of the Church, and therefore God.
I know that your ceremony has caused consternation and some hurt in our family, and what you may feel is close minded backwards thinking, may be the same Church teachings held by others that I have mentioned. You may have even thought some that you love would not be receptive or be hurt by the idea of your ceremony.
I wish you the best with your future, and hope when our paths cross again, we may have a better understanding of each other.
You are in my thoughts and prayer,
Cousin
Update 1/6/09: I’m just adding a link to My Response To My Cousin, which has been up since the same day I posted this but has not been linked to directly from here.
50 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
You missed one hellava party!
What a douche. I hope that made the cousin feel better. Talk about holier than thou.
“The interesting thing is what you do to act upon your sexual orientation.” It would seem that Cousin needs to find some more appropriate interests, such as digging for angel bones.
What is interesting to me is the sheer malice involved in Cousin’s sending a theologically unstudied and syntactically awkward letter such as this one. It is, rather than an attempt to reach “a better understanding”, an attempt to separate those family members who feel “consternation and some hurt” from those other godless savages who would celebrate your love.
Your response is well phrased and touchingly impassioned, though a bit overlong. I would have said, simply, “I don’t piss in your communion wine, so don’t poop on my wedding cake.”
Very well said! I agree completely. Its rather sad that there are humans such as “cousin” seeing as they are obstructing evolution from taking it’s natural course. but of course, cousin doesn’t think evolution is “interesting”.
Religion does not give anyone the right to go against our constitution and deny equal rights to other equal taxpayers, no matter what they choose to ignorantly believe in.
“No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another, and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him.”
~Thomas Jefferson
“Of liberty I would say that, in the whole plenitude of its extent, it is unobstructed action according to our will. But rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law,’ because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual.”
~Thomas Jefferson
“That the desires of the majority of the people are often for injustice and inhumanity against the minority, is demonstrated by every page of the history of the whole world”
~John Adams
“Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”
- Steven Weinberg
any law or ignoble thinking that would seek to restrain, enjoin, or otherwise deny the rights of any human being to walk this earth and live their lives in a manner befitting their mien, is a violation of spiritual law, universal law, and logical humane theosophy. IN other simpler words,” tend to your own life, and leave mine alone”. Jimi Hedrix said it perfectly,” I’m the one that’s got to die when it’s time for me to die, so let me live my life the way I want to”. Sound trite? well maybe what is needed is a language that more simply says it to these morons who still believe that the way to get ahead in this life is by tying the hands of any one different than they. I know, I’m long winded, but I do go off. thanks
Selectively quoting random people is a poor way to support your point.
Thomas Jefferson wrote legislation that stated the punishment for sexual immortality, including homosexuality among other things, was castration for men and the mutilation of the nose for women.
John Adams’s most famous speech said thus: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”
He also publicly attacked Thomas Paine for downplaying Christianity, stating “The Christian religion is, above all the religions that ever prevailed or existed in ancient or modern times, the religion of wisdom, virtue, equity and humanity…”
And you went off-topic by citing a physicist. I can just as easily start quoting Newton and his views on religion, and he was arguable more important as a physicist.
Anyhow, it is really easy to call your opponents bigoted and ignorant. But you should really learn how judicial review works. The Supreme Court will not hear gay marriage simply because there’s no illegality in having a group of people define marriage. Technically, no group is being discriminated against; “marriage is between a man and a woman” is different from “gay people are not allowed to marry” because gay people are included in men and women.
And the Founding Fathers would be rolling in their graves if they knew the people were asking the courts to determine their rights. They make the point very clear that it is the PEOPLE who determine the PEOPLE’S rights.
I love that your first sentence is about selectively quoting people and then you go ahead and do it for the rest of your comment.
Thomas Jefferson also owned slaves, so his views on human rights were not always correct as we now see them, but his overall views on democracy and majority rule were startlingly wise. As human societies progress, they also, hopefully, become more cognizant of human dignity, and Jefferson recognized this. He also advocated that a democratic majority not lord itself over the minority, and that all it takes for a society to slip into tyranny is for good people to not speak up against those who would do them harm. How’s that for selective quotes?
John Adams was right, and you are apparently not among those he was talking to since you apparently would use his words to justify taking rights away from people, or not awarding them those rights in the first place. People who would take away or deny the rights of others have no place in a democracy. You do not have the right to live free of uncomfortable thoughts. If you don’t like the idea that gay people get married that’s fine, but you need to keep that to yourself, as it has no real effect on your life other than your getting your panties in a bunch about it for no good reason. Such a viewpoint has no effect on you whatsoever other than to scratch some mental itch, but for me, my husband, and my family your viewpoint has direct and harmful consequences. It relegates us all to secondhand status while you and the rest of the majority lord those rights over us, making us fight our way through your ignorance and lies to sit on the same pedestal you do. That is not a moral position.
And I don’t particularly care if John Adam thought Christianity was the greatest religion ever; it is irrelevant to any discussion about, well, anything, really. People of one religion always think they have the best one, otherwise they would convert to another of which they thought better. It’s not like Christians sit around thinking, “Goodness, Christianity sucks, I wish I was a Muslim.” If they thought that they would go ahead and convert and then start arguing that Islam was the best religion. This country was founded by people escaping religious oppression that was served upon them by a government-mandated religion. The only way to free a political system from such evil is to exclude religion from that political system as the Founding Fathers did, to take religion out of the political equation entirely with the express purpose of letting people from all faiths worship as they please and to not favor any one religion over the other.
I think you and I practice very different forms of Christianity. Whose Christ wins?
I think you are referring to my reference to Anselm, as I don’t think I quote any physicists.
Saint Anselm was not a physicist, he was an archbishop and one of the greatest Christian thinkers to ever live. He helped bring the Church out of the Crusades and set the stage for much of modern philosophy and Christianity. Some might even say he was instrumental in saving Christianity from irrelevance in the face of the Enlightenment.
Gay people are in fact being discriminated against in the marriage debate because gay people are born fundamentally different than straight people, just as black people are born fundamentally different than white people. By your argument, “technically” when black people weren’t allowed to marry white people they were not being discriminated against because “black people” are included in “men and women,” and “men and women” can get married. Yet the Court thankfully stepped in and said, “No, this is denying these people equal protection under the law.”
If the Founding Fathers thought that courts should not be there to correct things when they go astray then they wouldn’t have put courts into the Consitution in the first place. The Courts were specifically put there to balance out the power of the legislature and the president. People only talk the way you are talking when they don’t like the decisions the Court makes. If your legislators came along and told you women no longer had the right to vote and Court struck that down, would that be wrong? Perspective helps a lot.
None of your arguments hold up. Not. A. Single. One. If you want to keep thinking the way you do, fine, but get the hell out of my family’s way and let us live our lives in loving peace like you ostensibly live yours (although, judging from this vitriolic letter, I imagine that is not how you live your life. My marriage has nothing to do with you, so stop acting like it does.
Thanks for saying the things that I cannot.
well said. thanks.
From your introduction (“heartbreaking letters”), I was expecting…well, heartbreaking letters. What part of this letter is inappropriate or hurtful? This person expresses love, concern and understanding, while at the same time maintaining their faith in what the “holy book” of their faith says. It seems like just about the most well-balanced response a person of faith can have toward someone they love. Granted, I don’t really understand the “point” of the letter, and it’s not particularly well written. Still, there’s nothing mean or unkind here. It seems like a pretty respectful and kind way to state your differences. Could someone tell me what is so heartbreaking about this letter.
Hi Kris, I don’t think I wrote the part about heartbreaking letters, that must have been somebody else linking here. I think the hurtful thing is the presence of the letter itself. There was no reason for him to write; he wasn’t going to change my mind or make me not gay or not get married. It was hurtful to me. The most well-balanced response he could have had was to say congratulations, or he could have just not replied and kept to himself. But he didn’t. I didn’t write him to tell him he was a sinner after he got a divorce, or for any other reason, for that matter, and I doubt anyone else did, either, because that would just been being mean. My response to him details some of my objections to your comment, such as the fact that the holy book itself says nothing about gay marriage (and the stuff it say about straightmarriage isn’t exactly good, either–see Newsweeks’ article on gay marriage for another look at the religious issues surrounding this). I also detail that it is the tenets of his particular faith that are wrong, and that when those tenets are wrong that blindly following them without considering how those actions might affect others is also hurtful. In any case, I think my response speaks for itself.
I am so sorry that he would say that to you. As you well know, his letter is ridiculous and hurtful, and you should pay no attention, instead pity him for not being able to see since there’s a dirty piece of toilet paper glued to his face. no offense to your cousin, i may have gone too far, haha, you are still related…
The problem with Lisa Miller’s article is that it seems to forget to include people who oppose gay marriage, preferring instead to lump them into groups and speaking for them.
it’s heartbreaking that such people could have such twisted and blind perceptions of the world. they are suggesting that since their cousin is gay, it is his duty to remain abstinent but OF COURSE it’s just fine for her to have as much sex as she wants as long as she’s married. That’s just B.S. It’s heartbreaking that a person would say to their own cousin that their union to another man is HURTING his family? That is extremely mean and malicious! His cousin did absolutely nothing wrong and is now being told that he has sinned in the eyes of God and his family. If God wanted some people to be abstinent, He would have simply created them without the physical ability to have sex. If He made them attracted to people of their own gender… it’s probably because He wouldn’t mind if they had sex. Please reconsider this letter.
Are you serious???????that letter hurt and offend me must by reading it!!! How condesending of you and cousin shame on you!!!!!
My reply was to KRIS!!!!!!
I am proud to be your brother!
I just stumbled across your website, so forgive me for throwing in a comment. I think your cousin did a good job of explaining his position without being needlessly polemical – something which can be tough in these situations. (Although it should be noted that contrary to what he said, the Catholic Church does recognise non-sacramental – i.e. natural – marriages between unbaptized heterosexual couples.)
I know I’m just a random stranger, but I think you need to realise that your cousin wants what he thinks is good for you; I doubt he wrote the words above with a sneering attitude, especially since he starts out talking about his own sins, and how he still falls. These situations are difficult, because if he hadn’t written a sincere explanation, you might’ve been offended by his silence. Better that your differences are expressed in a charitable way, surely? The Catholic Church itself has said:
“The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.”
If you want to know more about where your cousin is coming from, see:
http://couragerc.net/MTChastityand%20Homosexuality.html
excuse me, being gay is not a “condition”. you don’t DIE from it, nor do you need any medical attention! it’s obviously natural, and people shouldn’t treat it as though it were some plague that needed to be taken care of, for God’s sake!
Thank you Lila! I have been trying to tell the homophobic people at my church that for years. It’s sad to see that certain people can’t accept others the way they were made at birth. I mean, to say that being gay isn’t natural is like saying a black person chooses to be black or that I chose to be white. So when people say that I should go get “treatment” for my “condition,” it’s beyond hurtful.
Philip makes a point that we do not chose how we look like or how our personalities are or what sexual orientation we are. I agree with the fact that homosexuality is not a “condition”. I think that was poorly phrased.
However, I think you’re missing the point on what Bob was trying to convey. I believe we are all called to serve the Lord in different ways; we each have our own crosses to bear. The Church wants each and every one of us to accept our brothers and sisters for who they are and for those brothers and sisters to carry there cross as I do mine and you, yours.
Love thy neighbor as yourself. Love the gays. Love the straights. Be vigilant.
religion has nothing to say about civil marriage. NOTHING!!!
I don’t think it’s as obvious as being black.
For one, you don’t realize you’re gay for a long time, whereas most people know they’re black from the onset.
In addition, some people have chosen to be gay. Regardless of whether not you are born in such a way, it can ALSO be a choice.
Thus, there is much ambiguity.
Anyhow, innateness does not excuse a person from the consequences of his actions. It is like saying someone was born with violent tendencies, thus they should be excused when they act upon these tendencies. (And do not bring up “no harm, no foul,” that is also an improper argument, as there being plenty of things considered immoral but not harmful.)
The concept of sexual orientation itself doesn’t usually develop at all, gay or straight, until the onset of puberty, but even then the vast majority of all people know at a very early age, typically as far back as they can remember, what their sexual orientation is. Most straight people know from the outset that they are straight, just as most gay people do. Almost every scientific study on this topic would back this claim up, but if you don’t trust forty or fifty years of research on the topic then an informal survey of your straight and gay friends would probably turn up the same result. Go ahead, ask your straight friends, “So when did you know that you were straight?” and see what their response is.
Since sexuality is a fluid thing there are certainly exceptions to both of those notions, but generally speaking sexual orientation is not something that sneaks up on you. The only people who debate this notion are straight folk who don’t want gay people accepted in society, and so they call into question the innateness of those gay peoples’ sexuality, as if the gay people are responsible for proving this to those straight people before the straight people will consider treating the gay people with the same level of respect and dignity. While there are exceptions, the majority of gay people and the majority of most straight people don’t waffle on their sexuality. If we have to accept a claim from a straight person that they are innately straight then we must, by all rights, accept the same claim from a gay person that they are innately gay.
And even if it was a choice, it would be a choice that is more fundamental to what it is to be human than, say, religion, which is a much higher-level mental construct. It’s more fundamental to the concept of biology in general, at least in the sense that there are many different types of gay animals, and we can be reasonably certain that no other animals besides us possess the ability to conceptualize religion. And yet we grant people an incredible amount of rights regarding religion even though religion is a choice that a person can change at any moment. So we have one thing, sexuality, that by the vast majority of both scientific and anecdotal evidence is described as innate; and another thing, religion, that is by definition a choice people make, and yet our society protects the rights of people to make the choice to believe in something but not the rights of people to live their lives as their biology dictates to them. That’s not right.
Did you ever have any question about your heterosexuality, or have you just always known you were straight? Why would you think it was any different for a gay person? I never had any question about my being gay. But straight people have it easy since there is no cultural shame in heterosexuality. They simply hit puberty in a society that accepts their sexual orientation and keep on chugging, whereas a gay kid has to find the courage to stand up to a society where, in many places, coming out can mean years of bullying, taunting, and physical harm, not to mention the overall cultural shame that comes along with it. Gay people have to constantly defend themselves against straight people who demand that they “prove” that their homosexuality is innate. The notion that anybody would choose to live a life like this, where I have to have conversations like the one I am having now, in an attempt to have the same legal recognition for my husband and the kids we’re going to have someday, is absurd and shameful. The notion that any of us can dictate who another loves, or what a family looks like, is just awful.
So while many gay people don’t come out till later in life, it is usually a question of them being brave enough to stand up to the inevitable onslaught they will face for the rest of their lives because the world around them becomes a much more dangerous, scary place. People are murdered and beaten and taunted and bullied for being gay, and in many places coming out isn’t even a cultural option.
And no, innateness does not excuse someone from the consequences of his actions. But the comparison you make is a false one. Putting a personal, private, loving relationship between two people on the same level as someone who has violent tendencies is a rather absurd comparison, to be quite frank. Violence by definition involves malice and most importantly it involves intent to cause willful harm to others.
As I said in my original letter, being gay is really about one thing: love. It has to do with some people in the world being born a certain way, and that certain way meaning that they fall in love with people of the same sex. But you cannot start with the argument that something is immoral and go from there. You must first establish that it is objectively immoral, something which I think is impossible, since I do not think you can come up with any non-religious reason homosexuality is immoral. And for every religious argument you can come up with, there is another religious argument from another religion to rebut your viewpoint. You also have establish that notion outside the framework of religion, since different religions dictate different moral codes, and we cannot as a society use any one religion to dictate the behaviors of everyone.
The Christ I believe in says homosexuality is moral, and that those who would use his name to prevent other people from being loving are the immoral ones. But that’s just my religion. We have to find a common philosophical language to speak, because otherwise we will have disagreements on such a fundamental level that we’ll never be able to reconcile them.
In short, we can’t start off a conversation with you telling me “You’re not normal, you’re immoral, now try to convince me otherwise,” because quite frankly from what you have written I think the same thing about you.
If someone expressed similar, patronizing, “kind” concern over a white person marrying a black person, would that be acceptable? I thought we moved beyond judging those for the color of their skin or the shape of their bodies. You assume that it’s ok to warn people of being gay because it’s wrong, as if being gay/straight/bi/curious/asexual is something one can choose. It isn’t. It is who you are. Is someone a lesser human being for that reason?
The bible also says that the sons of Canaan will be the cursed children, slaves to the others’ children– some used this as justification for slavery. So tell me, are you going to seek out these descendants of Canaan and make them your slaves? If we found them, would you make them your slave? Or haven’t we matured beyond the blind following of the Bible? I think we have– everyone who reads the Bible chooses the interpretation they want. Where does it say EXPLICITLY that homosexuals are bad? Where does it say, aside from in Sodom and Gomorrah some people wanted to “know” the angels? What does know even MEAN? And how do you know it’s translated correctly?
My point is we pick and choose what we want to take from the Bible, and as we have chosen to move on from judging people by the color of their skin and making slaves of them, we can also move beyond this ridiculous notion that homosexuality is punishable by God’s wrath. By that judgment, an entire race of people is doomed to eternal slavery ’cause some kid looked at his father naked. C’mon, we’re an adult world now, aren’t we?
Er… to answer your many questions.
We know these are translated correctly because we have THOUSANDS of manuscripts with pretty much the same words on them, written mostly in Hebrew and Greek. You can view the oldest complete copy of the New Testament online here:
http://www.codex-sinaiticus.net/en/manuscript.aspx
You will need to learn Koine Greek though. xD
Genesis 19 has the account of Sodom and Gomorrah, but this is ambiguous.
Leviticus 18:22 and Leviticus 20:13 calls homosexuality an abomination, but this was apart of the Mosaic Law and technically does not apply anymore.
Corinthians 6:9 and 1 Timothy 1:9-10 both also condemn homosexuality, but the translation is rather loose, the word being used can be interpreted as a homosexual, effeminate man, boy prostitute or pimp.
Then we have Romans 1:26-27, which is a direct condemnation of homosexuality by Paul, who writes with the authority of the Holy Spirit. It is also interesting to note that this is the only part of the Bible that mentions (and condemns) lesbianism. Progressives, however, use creative hermeneutics to try to work around this, but the Greek and Hebrew are both quite clear.
Slavery back then was also very different from the form practiced in the early modern era. It was mostly debt slavery rather than race slavery, and even in the case of foreign slaves, there were rules set down in the Bible to protect these people. But this is a poor example, since the first people to speak out against slavery were Christians.
Anyhow, Christian scholarship and archeology is highly developed and open, unlike Hindu, Buddhist, and Muslim counterparts.
Although some of the references to homosexuality are a bit ambiguous, Romans 1:26-27 is a clear cut condemnation of it. If you do not take this single passage seriously, I would have to ask why you take any other passage seriously. Note that the Bible is not your wishful thinking, what the original intent of the writer, inspired by the Holy Spirit, is what matters.
Well said. Many times, we see people in today’s day and age picking and choosing what parts of the Bible they are going to follow and take as truth. In reality, as you said, ALL of it is truth inspired by God, not a book that ‘is no longer applicable in today’s culture’, as people like to claim.
As for Nick, I believe I understand why you were hurt by your cousin’s letter, because you do not see any point in writing such a letter. However, I must agree with others who have posted before, in that your cousin was not trying to condemn your actions in a mean-spirited way, but rather was trying to establish common ground and help you understand why he holds the views he does on your situation. All considered, I do believe he approached the matter in an empathetic, caring way.
That being said, I wish you a fruitful and prosperous life.
In Christ,
Alex
I just have one question? how on God’s green earth does a homosexual couple’s marriage affect mine? If they live next door to me how does that somehow dilute/dissolve/diminish or lessen the love I have for my (hetero) husband?
Can some raging bigot out there please explain to me how a loving union between another (gay) couple threatens mine??
HOW DOES MIND YOUR OWN BEESWAX SOUND? how about love thy neighbor?
Let them take the holy bible and stick it where the sun don’t shine…!
Amen Sistah!
I’m sorry that your cousins letter offended you, but I’m sure that it was not “cousins” intention. I had a similiar discussion with a family member when they “came out of the closet”. I did it because I love her, and I do fear about what will happen to her in the next life. (just like I’m sure cousin does) This topic has caused so many to question the bible…… I just told my loved one that for her sake I do hope it’s wrong, but I still believe and will until the man himself says it’s not true. Your cousin wrote this to you with love, and in privacy. I think it’s sad that you posted this on internet for everyone to see when “cousin” was respectful enough to express their feelings in private rather than in front of a family that would’ve taken cousins side. I don’t see anything mean or hateful, just love and concern.
Gosh, i wish i had a nickel for every “straight” married man i have been with. I could retire tomorrow. Trust me, no one is restraining from acting on their impulses. Everyone knows that sexuality is in a spectrum, there are 100 percent straights and 100 percent gays and then there is the in between which is about 60 percent of the population that may have a stray thought about same sex mating or may act out on it. They are having some same sex episodes. Cousin, we have brains but we are also animals.
I wonder what cousin would think of my straight friends that go to swinger bars?
There is just no end to the hypocrisy. Cousin should be more worried about his straight married friends that are out cheating on their spouses or priests that are taking advantage of altar boys.
Spare me and Nick forever more from this kind of “love and concern.”
Nick, I’m right there with you, brother. Best regards to you and your partner (spouse!) from me and mine.
I am so glad your god is not mine, just read some of the crazy things you would have to follow if you also followed Leviticus 18:22 (one man not being with another). If you don’t believe me look it up for yourself.
Leviticus 25:44 you may possess slaves from another country
Exodus 21:7 Selling your daughter into slavery
Lev 15:19-24 not contact with a woman or anything she touches while she is on her period
Lev. 1:9 Burning a bull at the alter
Exodus 35:2 Being put to death for working on the Sabbath
Lev. 11:10 eating shellfish is an abomination
Lev. 19:27 It is forbidden for men to trim their hair
Lev 11:6-8 touching the skin of a dead pig is unclean. Footballs out for you guys.
Happy reading
Dawn,
You make valid points and pose some interesting laws from the OT. However, thanks to our Savior Jesus Christ, a new covenant has been formed between us and God in which we no longer need to follow such laws in living out our faith.
I agree with you though, having to follow those laws would have been brutal! Luckily, we no longer have to
Hi Nick,
I received a similar letter from my aunt when I emailed my entire address book with an open letter to my friends and family about Proposition 8. Doesn’t surprise me, religious people are so deep in their convictions (my aunt is Mormon) that they don’t care if it tears apart their relationships with their family, they have to tell it how it is.
By the way, I can’t find your email anywhere on this site, but can you shoot me a quick email if you still have those Invisalign cleaning photos, they aren’t on the blog any more. I got a good laugh while reading your invisalign stories, I experienced exactly the same thing with mine, ESPECIALLY the no more nail biting and (oops) triming the nails all the way down and not leaving a single nail to remove the trays with.
what is so different about this poor written letter?!
For those people who preach that God won’t accept any union based on love…I think that you’re missing the point. God could care less what your sexual orientation may be. If there is a judgment day I hope and pray that it will be based on the good you bring into the world and the kindness you show others…even unlike yourself. I don’t think your next life will be affected at all by your sexual orientation.Perhaps Christians who claim that their way is the only way should have more to be concerned with in the next life. I am a Christian and I believe God is a lenient God. Any marriage is a commitment to love whether it is same sex partners or man and wife. We need to strive for Peace among all people of the World. Differences bind us together in so many ways. How boring it would be if everyone was exactly alike and there was no variation from one person’s ideals. We would be strangling each other from boredom. Go then in peace and start your own Communities where only husband and wife reside…Fool all those born within, to believe that nobody is different and that all they are ever going to experience in life… is what they already have. Good Luck! ds
Ya, but plenty of married men and women dont have children because there are some people who just shouldn’t be parents. It could be an institution for raising children, but that would be bad for kids who end up with crappy parents. I really don’t believe in marriage. Period. But Same sex marriage doesn’t violate it’s sanctity, divorce does. I do support divorce (when its necessary for two people to be sane) but thats what destroys marriage, that and vegas. You’re full of shit and probably in question of your own sexuality or have been brainwashed by so called “religious officials” (some of whom, engage in REAL innapropriate sexual relations and are not even serving time for it.)
Being gay is not a natural occurence, or “condition”, as people are presumably assuming. The fact is, as someone wrote, people are like animals, but in my mind are separated because they have the capacity to think logically.
Animals survive because they are the fittest of the species, and the traits that they carry on are what sustains life. Animals are not gay. So, logically, if we do not see cases of homosexuality in the wild, it is obviously not a natural thing in humans as well. If animals are living because one essential part of life is to REPRODUCE, then why would ANY animal be gay? They aren’t, and that applies to people as well.
There are many people that were gay and become straight because they knew it wasn’t natural for them. I’m not condemning homosexuals, but am only replying to the argument that homosexuality is a natural occurence and that Christians and other religions condoning homosexuality should “love one another.”
In this case, it IS showing that we love one another. The Bible says that homosexuality is a sin in the eyes of the Lord and that a marriage is constituted between a man and a woman. If your family member was gambling because they thought it was fine but it kept getting them in debt, wouldn’t you lovingly stop them because you loved them? Even if they loved to gamble? Why would you help them? Because you knew it was good for them in order to ensure a safe future.
In the same way, we love others by telling them the truth. Even though they might not want to hear the news, people still say something because it will help them in the long run.
The Bible clearly states that marriage is between a MAN and a WOMAN. Not a man and a man, not a woman and a woman. Whoever is a Christian and believes otherwise is incorrect in their beliefs. You can’t just twist God’s words into whatever you want to believe and what the world supports. You don’t read the driving booklet and decide to change the laws because you believe the law is a lenient judge. No, you follow the laws because if you don’t, people don’t care that you think the system is “lenient.” They know you broke the laws that were set and bound, and so you get punished. Same with Christianity. Christianity is not just a religion. It’s a relationship created between you and the Lord, through Jesus Christ. It isn’t just “Oh, I have to follow all the commandments and become a Christian because otherwise I might go to hell.” Heck no! You work to forge an intimate relationship where you trust him no matter how good or how bad the situations may be.
Being a Christian and not believing in gay rights is not conforming to society. It’s obeying God’s commandments.
And to who said that the laws set in the Bible are ridiculous, think again. You bring up arguments/laws that were created back in Biblical times. Those have changed, even in the Bible itself! You haven’t done your research, if all you can come up with is an argument for pro-gay rights. If you read later on in the New Testament, a disciple dreams a dream THREE TIMES in which “unclean animals”, like the pig skin you mentioned before, are allowed to be eaten. Even the disciple was reluctant, but God specifically told him that it was alright for him to consume them.
to prrr: Homosexuality is not a race. God will not wipe out a race. It is the fact that people will face judgement for living the way they do.
To the people who use the fact that the Bible supported laws that helped slavery exist in the Old Testament, seriously, stop wallowing in the past and finding evidence. Scientists and average people logically use the most recent evidence to show that their points are valid. Jesus Christ said to “love your neighbor as yourself.” Yes, and so every person would be treated equally, because no one wants to be treated like a slave, now do they?
The letter that your cousin wrote was honestly, not hateful at all. It clearly stated that they still loved you and was telling you how confused they were when their love for you conflicted with their moral beliefs. Why can’t you just see how much they care for you to actually write a letter, than the alternative that you “prefer” by not sending you a letter at all? Isolate yourself if you wish, but people were not created to be alone, as stated in the first book of the Bible. And don’t bring up the fact that because it was one of the first things written, it defeats all my other arguments concerning slavery, unclean animals, etc. That fact, that people need each other, is repeated twice, once by God and once implied in the story of Caan. There is nothing later in the Bible that states that people were in fact meant to be alone. Anyways, your cousin obviously loves you, and you’re pushing them away. There is not hatred in his/her letter; just concern and their perspective on the matter, and the hope that they would not have relations be severed because of such an event.
Jillian, I am sorry, I can’t really follow your letter. You start off with several false premises and then proceed to make leaps in logic and strange accusations from there. You misquote the Bible, ignore the things you want to ignore, and pay attention to the things you want to pay attention to. Then you contradict yourself at least twice. Could you re-read your argument and then rewrite a response so that it’s logically, spiritually, and morally consistent? Believing in the Bible when you feel like it is not Christian. That’s called salad-bar Christianity: you pick the things you want and leave the rest. You need to step up and know your BIble, know your Christian history, and be able to argue properly about things like this if you are going to set about decrying things. Without that you’re just regurgitating false talking points and showing that you don’t know enough of your own religion to defend it properly.
Here’s two hints for you to use as a springboard:
If you can come back with something that is based on logic and that shows consistency in belief then I’d be happy to hear it. If you can’t do that, I’d also be happy for you to stop muddying up the discussion by bearing false witness against your god and using his name to advance a viewpoint that is hateful, illogical, and quite frankly wrong.
Wow Jillian’s post was fillied with so much mis-information and lies I thought I was watching those yes on 8 commercials again.
Ghandi was right, these Christians act nothing like Christ.
If you can read, then you should have NO difficulty t following the letter. You are refusing to see
an opposing view and want to dwell in self-pity
for “hurt” feelings. Buck up – if you want to
live a life wedded to another man – fine. Just
don’t expect that others won’t be uncomfortable
with the decision. You are correct – you have
EVERY Right to it – just as those who aren’t
good with it have EVERY RIGHT NOT TO BE!
Lady, I am in no way dwelling in self-pity. Dwelling in self-pity would have been not responding to him and sitting around moping because I felt powerless in the face of prejudice. I am not powerless — the very act of getting married was in and of itself a courageous, defiant act against those who would smother love. I am proud of who and what I am; I stopped dwelling on it long ago. Likewise, you would do quite well to not put words and feelings in my mouth. If I was dwelling in self pity I’d say so; I don’t need you assuming and then saying it for me, thank you very much.
I do however pity my cousin, and people like him, for talking out both sides of their mouth, for espousing love when there really is none. You cannot respect an opposing viewpoint when that viewpoint is that I and those like me are an aberration and that at the very least we should not be afforded the same rights and respect as others, and at the most extreme end of the spectrum should be eliminated from life entirely. I can’t have a dialog under those circumstances, where I go about trying to convince another person that my fundamental existence isn’t wrong and where I plead with them to be treated as an equal. That position would be pitiful.
And I don’t care in the slightest if other people are uncomfortable with it. I expect that to be the case, and I’m used to it. I’m uncomfortable around prejudiced bigots, but as long as they don’t actively try to stop me from living my life then they can go and be bigoted all they want. It’s when they somehow entangle my personal, intimate life with their belief system and somehow expect that my behavior should comply with them that I get pissed.
Somebody needs to knock you off of your soap box. Your babble is like the pot calling the kettle black. How dare you tell someone that if their belief is not in line with how YOU interpret the bible then they are not Christian beliefs. It is judgmental – ignorant statements like your ramblings that give us Christian’s a bad name. You missed the boat when you stated that we are to love our neighbors as we love ourselves- is that how you love yourself, so conditionally? Forget research- you need consistency- Perhaps you have heard of it or at least read about it in all of your research, you know – Some UNconditional love, you know the kind that GOD and Jesus have for all of US on this earth! And that is my sin for the hour!
This cousin thought that it was within the realm of possibility that the catholic church would allow you to have sex with whomever you wanted as long as you werent married… wow
What “Cousin” fails to realize, is “a marriage not blessed By God, is not a marriage”.
Who says God did not bless any of these marriages? The “Law” is the one not blessing them, NOT GOD!!!!
Same sex couples have always had the “Right” to a Civil ceremony…finding a person of Faith to join them and blessing their union is NOT the problem . It is the civil aspect of the government, who is not and can not be swayed by religion, that is not blessing the union therefore the marriage is not sinful, until GOD tells them it is such, not another human being.
What I would like to ask your cousin if I had the opportunity is, Aren’t the Ten Commandments supposed to be GOD’s first and most holy words… so where does it say “thou shalt not be homosexual?” What it does say is “thou shalt not covet….. something that we all do everyday and if you say you don’t well you are breaking another commandment but that is besides my point. Cousin’s reference to being righteous in the eyes of GOD….well that is why Jesus died on the cross- for ALL of OUR SINS….. because there is no righteous human- Please correct me if I have misunderstood the teachings from all the years of catechism.
Whatever happened to “Separation of Church and State”?
If you want to believe that Marriage is only valid as a sacrament within the Catholic Church, of course you can believe what you like. But then, what about the great majority of marriages in America that aren’t Catholic? Protestants don’t see marriage as a sacrament. Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, atheists, people of any religion and none at all get married every day — and nobody complains, nobody whines about how this marriage is not within the rules of that religion.
Civil marriages, devoid of any religion, have been conducted by judges, justices of the peace, and city hall clerks since the founding of our republic. All governments of the world honor civil marriages. (Granted, some, like Israel, won’t allow them within the country, but recognize marriages performed abroad.) No church ever squawked about the validity of marriages performed by officials of atheist “communist” states.
A number of churches, synagogues, and Muslim imams do support and perform same-sex marriage. How are they any less entitled to their religious beliefs?
If you have religious objections to gay marriage, you don’t have to have one, or even attend one. My religion forbids alcohol and pork. I abstain from both, but have no right to tell you not to enjoy your pork chop and chablis. And you have no right to impose your religious rules on me.
The vacuity of the religious argument against same-sex marriage is laid bare by the fact that, in a secular state with freedom of religion, it has NEVER been made against marriages that don’t conform to the rules of any particular religious institution. It is homophobia, pure and simple.
If your religion demands that you insult your gay cousin you have every right to be as rude and insulting as you think Jesus wants you to be. But our Constituion forbids anyone imposing their religious rules on the rest of us.
Hello Nick! I would just like to state that this letter which was sent to you by your cousin is extremely insulting, to you personally, and that you do not deserve to bear any of these false accusations with any humane thoughts of understanding, with any use of a single priceless iota of time, or with any expenditure of valuable reasoning. Had it been me who received this letter, with no defined purpose other than for him to take a free stab at your marriage and then to hide behind the righteousness and sanction of christianity, I would have replied simply, “To hell with you.” This letter was not written by a human, who could’ve grasped the ugly invasiveness of his beliefs, but by a creep, a creature. Any rational human mind would not have permitted its owner to insult your lifestyle at the most fundamental level as your cousin has done, at the level of good and evil. Personally, I cannot understand religious people. You cannot trust them, absolutely everything they believe rests on a “basis” of faith. It has nothing to do with reality, nothing to do with sense, only the blind hope of guessing at good and evil. As for his alleged “good intentions”, they mean nothing. What do intentions matter? The greatest evils in the world are ALWAYS performed with the best intentions. But I have no idea what your cousin intended with this letter other than to state his filthy beliefs that directly offend you and then apologize for it? But I would not trust him ever again. Nor would I permit for him to ever spit his words to me, unless he desired a true conversation with a defined purpose of gaining some understanding. Obviously, that is not shown here.