[kathsua]

I wonder if Christians would have more success opposing homosexual marriage if they relied on a scientific argument instead of a moral argument. Obama and many other politicians frequently demonstrate that they don't care about morality. I think the idea of two men getting married or two women getting married sounds incredibly stupid.

[Sacajaweau]

The scientific argument is the moral argument.

I like framing moral arguments around "suppose everyone did it".

Guess what....no more human race.

[Salvavida]

Christianity’s response to homosexuality is far more than a moral argument: it advocates TRUTH, as proven by a resurrected Messiah. While science can and should be used to support truth, ultimately the Creator’s opinion is the only one that matters.

[Theoria]

'Human sexuality is determined by the sexual identity of the brain.'

Oh, no more a sin, eh? How about the gay gene, or fat gene. Perhaps the lying gene. Pedophile identity in the brain? I don't know how far the writer wants to take that part of the argument.

[tflabo]

If previously past generations could look down from heaven and see the current crop of humanity perplexed over the definition of marriage they would say what a generation of morons we’ve become.

[dragonblustar]

I always thought being gay was an extreme form of narcissism.

[srmorton]

I am a Christian and I also hold a Masters degree in biology. I base my opinion that homosexuality, except in rare cases, is a choice rather than genetic on my knowledge of biology and natural selection. There is no genetic “motivation” for something that does not serve to increase the likelihood of producing viable offspring to insure the survival of the species. Until recently, a gay man and a lesbian woman could not produce a child together without having sex in the heterosexual manner. Therefore, a gene for "gayness" would not likely have been selected for. I feel the same way about allowing a child to determine their "gender identity" and those who chose to undergo sex-change operations. If your genes say that you are XX, you are a woman. If your genes say XY, genetically you are a man, no matter what your mind (and whatever artificial hormones you may be taking) says.

[SaraJohnson]

It makes no sense from any point of view to permit gay radicals (feminazis) the power to re-engineer heterosexual sex and family. If you recall, in the past lesbian feminists were naming normal heterosexual sex, rape. They named normal heterosexual flirtation, sexual harassment and have ruined plenty of men and women with their legal activism in the name of feminism.

They can be strangled by their own twisted notions. They hate heterosexual unions and families, naming it the root of sexism against women. They hate children - naming them shackles on career women (women who want to pretend they are men - dykes).

If we open the door to special “race” rights for homos, gay “intellectuals” will destroy heterosexual love, marriage and family in the same way black race baiters, filled with race hate, have destroyed post segregation race relations. They don’t understand normal men and normal women and, in fact, lesbians hate heterosexuals sexually. They hate Christians, too.

[tophat9000]

Like air water food the heterosexual act / union is required for the human race to survive...logic dictates we acknowledge that unique status in our laws

[spunkets]

"Marriage is a biological function"

No it's not. It is a contract between a man and a woman that fundamentally contains the promise of commitment to a long term relationship.

[Sergio]

I think there might even be a third view.

Marriage ceremonies originated as “religious” ceremonies long before there were governments. Somewhere along the way, a “Church Wedding”, (religious marriage), became the same as a “City Hall/Justice of the Peace wedding”, (Civil/legal marriage).

That difference cannot be emphasized enough. One is a ceremony that unites a man and a woman and links that union to God, transcending the earthly realm. The other is a legal proceeding that unites two people into a legally binding contract. The tragedy was allowing both to be called by the same name.

I know that I, and probably the majority of religious folks have no issue with legal protections for same sex partners that include tax issues, visitation rights, property, insurance, etc, but all of that is legal, to be accomplished through a civil union.

Where people of faith have an issue is when the government tries to impose it's will on a long established religious ceremony.

[pallis]

Marriage is a contract between a man and a woman, between the families, with posterity and with our culture and God. It is exactly what the left and the radicals pushing the homosexual agenda wish to destroy. The cultural revolution has destroyed enough.

[This I Wonder32460]

You talked about the differences in the brain, men with female brains and women with male brains. Since I learned about the condition known as chimera, I have wondered if this is the cause of people who think they are the opposite sex as their body and genetics indicate, xx and xy. Supposedly, chimera is caused by the cells of what would have been a fraternal twin, being absorbed by the body of the surviving twin. Thus the surviving twin’s body possesses dna from both twins, yet the absorbed twin’s dna does show up in all of the cells of the surviving twins body, just in some. So if a surviving twin absorbed the cells from a opposite sex fraternal twin, would it be possible that the brain could be affected to think it is of the opposite sex because the absorbed twin’s cells went to the brain? I don’t know the answers, it’s just something that I’ve just wondered about since reading about the condition known as chimera.

[driftless2]

The institution of marriage was designed for males and females for procreation purposes. It was not intended for homosexuals who cannot reproduce. Homosexuality is a mental disorder, not a justification to assume the rights reserved for normal people.