Thursday, December 2, 2010

Another Your Say Letter... This time about gay marriage!

If anyone can grab a hold of the 3rd of December, 2010 copy of the Geelong Advertiser, they can read the letter to which mine is responding to (entitled 'Same-sex marriage against beliefs'). For those of you that can't, the general tone of the letter is a 'the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, I believe the Bible, therefore I win' type argument. This I couldn't let slide. Here is my response:

"In responding to Dennis Irvine’s letter regarding gay marriage (3/12), it is hard to believe that a person could be so disconnected from the facts.

Firstly, a literal reading of the Biblical account of creation (i.e. Adam and Eve) has been disproven by science. The evidence shows that humans evolved from, and still are, animals.

This does not disprove God, of course. It merely disproves that the Bible has an accurate portrayal of the origins of humanity.

The second point worth mentioning would be that it appears that Mr. Irvine is being selective in what he takes from the Bible.

In the same book that prohibits homosexual interactions, it also prohibits trimming the sides of one’s beard.

I doubt Mr. Irvine would write such an impassioned objection to the ‘immorality of beard trimming’.

The more relevant correction would be that there is no evidence that raising children in a same-sex environment is detrimental to their development.

It appears that the more important factor is whether children are raised in a loving environment, regardless of the gender of the parents.

Finally, it should be noted also that our society is a secular one. As such, our laws must have a reason that is not specific to religion. The justification must be relevant to all individuals, be they religious or non-religious.

Secularity is the only way in which a society that is comprised of religious and non-religious individuals can interact without the oppression of one group or the other.

Therefore, if you wish to argue that the law should not recognize gay marriage, a secular justification needs to be provided, not one based on personal religious beliefs."

As always, if I get a response, I will post more details.


  1. Succinct, clear and measured. 100/100.

    And: "In the same book that prohibits homosexual interactions, it also prohibits trimming the sides of one’s beard." Great use of the cherry-picking rejoinder.

    I look forward to more posts.

  2. Thank you kindly for the praise. Tis always good to hear your opinion.

    And thank Ruth for the beard trimming example; I asked her what she thought was the most silly of the Mosiac laws and that is what she gave me.

    Personally, I was going to go with 'stoning unruly children', but I think a silly example worked better than an immoral one.

  3. I found your article very interesting Lord Bishington. As Dylan's mother, I would have to say however, that the stoning of unruly children is one of the Mosaic law's I regret not upholding
    And as a 'practising' Christian, I have yet been able to find anything in the New Testament that says homosexuality is a sin.

  4. Thank you for the comment, Jenni.

    In regards to discussion of homosexuality in the NT, I think 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 gives a good summary:

    "Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

    That being said, this is Paul speaking (or writing), so I guess one could write it off as his own opinion rather than that of God's.