Another Concise (short) Rebuttal (counterclaim, reply) To A Dumb Argument Against Same Sex Marriage

Share Button

There is an interesting conversation going on on a Youtube video about same sex marriage, and whether you are being oppressive if you speak out against it. Here is one comment:

Oppression?  Give me a break!  Supporting marriage, as it was meant to be, (one man, one woman)  is not oppression, it’s preserving the human race.

Here is my reply:

I’m gay, and I, like all gays, I concur and whole heartedly join you in your support of marriages between one man and one woman. We also support extending the right / privilege to same sex couples. Gays are probably only about a 5 % of the population, and of that 5 %, about 20 % of those would choose to take that path. Statistically, that would be about .01 % of the population who would be entering into same sex unions.

Since people can and often do have babies without getting married, which means the human race is quite capable of preserving itself quite nicely, how is allowing and extending marriage to about .01 % of the population going to destroy the human race???????

I’m just asking.

Here’s the video that sparked the conversation.

UPDATE: And it gets more interesting. After one commenter notes “To condone sin is a sin, we are to be for God’s word and not what the world wants!”, I respond:

“OK… So why not leave the argument at that, instead of making stuff up about preserving the human race.

Now that we agree on that point, could you come back and list some of the times you’ve condoned other sins? Because I’m betting you’ve not taken the same stand with family and friends who you knew were committing other sins… It’s just that Gays are icky.?”

The reply?

“OF COURSE THERE ARE OTHER SINS BUT THE TOPIC HERE IS HOMOSEXUALITY AND HOW PERVERTED THIS WORLD HAS BECOME BECAUSE OF IT! ?”

Note that my question is never addressed. By not responding, the commenter seems to be admitting she is willing to ignore other sins in order to go after the favorite bugaboo. So, this statement “To condone sin is a sin” is meaningless then, isn’t it.