(Rathus, Nevid & Fichner-Rathus, 2005) Historical and scientific viewpoints are greatly significant in the way that gay persons distinguish themselves today and how the development of gay communities have grown and changed. For example, looking at the historical standpoint, many of the male Greeks seen exploring their curiosity of interacting sexually with a member of the same sex, as totally normal and natural. However, the Christian Church did not agree with this view. They viewed it as a sin and un-natural. They also believed that a gay person is committing a sin and would burn in hell for having a sexual experience with a person of the same sex.
Divine Command Theory In this essay, I will explain and critique four arguments offered to trounce the view known as the Divine Command Theory. The Divine Command Theory states that X is morally right if and only if God says so, just because God said so. According to this view, whether something is right or wrong depending on whether or not it violates one of the commands God has given. For example: “If the Divine Command Theory is true, then adultery is wrong just because God commanded that adultery is not permissible. Although, if God had not commanded that adultery is wrong, or if he commanded us to commit adultery, then it would be the morally correct thing to do.
Although the church teaches the idea that same-sex marriage is wrong, I believe that marriage is a right that should not be denied to any person. In America, same-sex marriage has been a controversial issue that has never been universally
From the very beginning of time, God created Adam and Eve, man and woman. God blessed the man and the woman with the words “Be fruitful and multiply” (Sacred text). From this point on it has been known that a marriage should take place between a man and a woman. Like I stated above same sex couples do not have the ability to do as God blessed, “Be fruitful and multiply.” In the church homosexual practices are known as “sins gravely contrary to chastity.” Whether or not people believe that homosexuality is a sin is, in fact, their own opinion. People who engage in these same-sex relationships will suffer consequences whether they want to or not.
One negative aspect to his essay would have to be his bias toward conservatives and the rich. He deliberately labels out the rich in many of his examples by pointing out how they claim to be Christian but do not wish to help aid the poor. As for conservatives, he not only points out George W. Bush but refers at times to religion as “conservative religion.” This clearly shows his bias toward them and could be a way for him to associate them with the American Christianity problem. I believe McKibben has a great point on this issue. As American Christians, we always believe that if we do good deeds or help ourselves we go to heaven.
Humphrey, they discuss facts and their beliefs on gay marriage. Dematteis goes more into depth about the issues in states, Politically, Presidential, Religion, and Demographics on same sex marriage, whereas Humphrey discusses more about the Religion view of same sex marriage. He strongly believes Religion depicts the view on same sex marriage, he believes we should believe what god believes, and what god believes is marriage is the love and commitment between two people of the opposite sex. Dematteis has views from all different perspectives, and he believes no one should judge anyone based on what gender he or she loves. He discusses more about what the people in America think in their States about same sex marriage.
He discredits the argument that, ”marriage is fundamentally a procreative unit” (Stoddard 738). The government tries to rectify not allowing same sex marriage to be legal because marriage is supposed to be a procreative unit. People should be entitled to love and marry whomever it is that they choose. The government tries to justify their standing on gay marriage by acknowledging the fact that same sex couples would not be able to birth a child together. If this is in fact a valuable reason to prevent someone from marrying, then why doesn’t the government create a law banning all women and men who cannot or will not have children from being able to legally marry.
He talks a bit about how same sex marriage will affect children, which I completely respect. He discusses marriage being associated with civil right incorrectly for things like tax breaks, property ownership, etc. The majority of his article is based upon what he believes is the “definition” of marriage. He talks about marriage including or being based upon a number of things such as; romance, passion, the female body, spiritualism, etc. All things he obviously doesn’t think the gay community is capable of.
This means that do we do good things because God says is good or do we do good things so than God says that it is good. Another argument I am going to examine, is for the statement, and it is an argument based on a group of people called Anti-Theists. They don’t believe in God, so they agree with the statement. However, Anti-Theists like Richard Dawkins say that anyone who believes in religion or in a god is an extremist and it clouds and distorts your view on morality. The next argument that I am going to examine is what some people in the world think, but it is based around Cultural Relativists, who say that if morality was decided for by God then he could say one day to murder somebody and it would be fine.
If a person is deeply in love with a person of the same sex they shouldn’t have to worry about if the government will let them get married or not and I have many reason as to how the government is violating peoples right’s. Same sex marriage in many religions is considered a sin and that’s the