Homosexuality, Marriage, Oh My!

[weaktwos]

This whole debate about religion, marriage, and homosexuality really makes me wish I was versed in transcribing historical records.

First of all, instinctually, it does not seem wrong to me for two people who love each other romatically to be allowed to be married. I don't see where the harm lies.

Marriage is as sacred as the two people want it to be. No more, no less.

Apparently a section in the Bible that says homosexuality is wrong is Corinthians 9-11. I pick up my King James version and it says:
9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters;for then must ye needs go out of the world.
11 But now I have written unto you not to kep company, if any man this is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

So how did "homosexuals" get in someone else's translation? And furthermore, if there's so much poetic license in biblical interpretation, how can they be a valid set of rules?

Comments

[imlac.livejournal.com]

The thing I love is that their rationale seems to go like this: the bible says homosexuality is wrong, therefore homosexuals should not be allowed to marry. The bible also says that lending money for interest is wrong, so does that mean that bankers shouldn't marry? Working on the Sabbath is a sin, but that doesn't mean that doing so makes one illegable for marriage. It also says that wearing mixed fabrics, trimming you hair, and taking the Lord's name in vain are all mortal trespasses. If homosexuality being wrong is what makes such marriages contraband, then why should ANYONE be allowed to marry?

(okay, I'll admit that there is some specious reasoning here on my part, since these other sins are incidental, not intergral to the marriage at hand. But still, I think I knocks people off their sanctimonious high-horses.)

Re:

[weaktwos.livejournal.com]

I know, I know.

We soooo need a new mythology. Gone are the good ol' days of nifty parables involving Zeus appearing as a bull or a golden shower to some female and conceiving a godlet. Those myths were fun.

Re:

[imlac.livejournal.com]

Oh, I think we have plenty of new mythos, it's just that none of them have caught on. Look at the new-age pheonomena. I see all that as a transparent response to the failure of religon and modernism to inject any meaning into our lives, so we just go out and start making shit up. Personally, I'll be much happier when we can just accept the fact that we're adrift and be at peace with it.

[weaktwos.livejournal.com]

Yes, I would agree. But then, who exactly would I get to satirize if everyone thought clearly?