Big debate in NY right now. My question, is opposition to legalized gay marriage based on bigotry? In other words, are there non-bigoted reasons for being against legalizing marriage for gays?

I have my own thoughts on this, but I'll withhold them for right now.

No.

I have never heard a non bigoted reason why gay people should not be allowed to get married, no.

People who think gays should not have the same rights as straights tend to be bigots.

I don't necessarily think people who support full equal rights but don't want to label it a marriage are bigots.

Since this is RGT, I will mention that one misconception that many Christian gay marriage opponents don't get is just because your position is dictated by your religion doesn't mean it isn't bigoted. Southern Baptists thought that God mandated slavery and segregation and Mormons thought that God cursed blacks and Orthodox Jews think that women aren't fit to pray with men. All those positions are nonetheless bigoted.

On the other hand, a religious person who believes his or her religion condemns homosexuality but who supports full equal legal rights for gays is not a bigot.

Yes. Categorically denying a right to one group when that right has nothing to do with the intrinsic difference relative to another group is bigotry.

No. I think there has been sufficient debunking of the "marriage is for procreation" nonsense and the like to dispense with it.

It is what it is.

The Old Testament lays out Gods judgments. Bigotry (well, most uses) doesn't seem to be condemned. I do see that Gays are condemned.

Not everyone agrees, and instead prefer their own judgments. Hence, the battle.

Aren't all sins also considered biblically equal (excepting, of course, the unpardonable sin of disbelief in the absence of facts)? There are no laws on the books about coveting your neighbors wife, or blaspheming god, why should you need laws regarding the marriage of gays? A purely religious argument doesn't wash here, unless you actively seek to have all biblical commands equally legally mandated.

edit:
Aaaand just noticed you're invoking Old Testament law specifically. If that doesn't open up a glorious mess of ridiculous legislation, I don't know what does.

oooofaaaa

Of course it's based on bigotry.

Of course there are non-bigoted reasons.

Pretty sure if you're against gay marriage you're a bigot. Claiming "but the Bible says you shouldn't and it's the word of God!" doesn't really work.

You simply have faith that it's the word of God since there's no evidence that it is. It's basically just a random book that you choose to have faith in. It turns out that the book preaches homophobia.

If I chose to have faith in a random book that preached murder and rape, you'd call me an *******. I don't think you can hide behind the claim "but I just think it's what God wants!" because there's obviously zero reason to believe that. It's just a claim you take purely on faith because you want to.

If you're against gay marriage in any way, I look at you as a bigot, the same way i would look at someone who is racist.

Either way, you're too stupid to be in my presence, so I'll disgregard that person's opinion completely.

If you are against it in the case of calling it marriage only, then I think we're ok. Everything else, you're lol stupid.

Care to suggest some? I can't think of a single one.

On the contrary, it is manifest that on a biological level reproductive organs are ordered primarily towards reproduction. Therefore, the use of those organs in sexual activity is primarily for the sake of reproduction. Marriage is the fitting relationship in which that activity takes place, because family is the natural environment in which human beings are to be educated.

The fundamental mistake is to think that marriage is a relationship based primarily on romance or having a "life partner" or anything like that. That error having been widespread in people's opinions about marriage for some time (the decades of high divorce rates and high promiscuity outside of marriage), it's no surprise that so many people now have difficulty understanding why a homosexual relationship couldn't be a marriage. It's because they don't get what a marriage is to begin with. It's a relationship that is fundamentally about bearing and raising children.

Yeah I basically disagree completely with literally everything you just said.

Who exactly is acting like a bigot here? You are saying that anyone who holds a certain opinion different from yours is necessarily stupid and not worthy of being in your presence.

"big·ot: n. - One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ."

LOL wait its bigoted to be intolerant of bigots? My head just exploded.

1. Reproductive organs are ordered towards reproduction.
-Is infertility not a medical problem or a case where health is lacking?

2. It is more common for people to now think that marriage is primarily about romance or having a life partner than it was in the past.
-You disagree with that?

3. High divorce rates and promiscuity outside of marriage have something to do with the changes in attitudes about marriage mentioned in #2.
-You disagree with that?

None of those 3 points have any relevance, WHATSOEVER, to this discussion.

I've never had sex for the sake of reproduction, only pleasure. So clearly this is wrong for at least some people (and probably most of them).

Actually people have sex outside of marriage without any problems all the time. In addition, even if your statement were true, that in no way invalidates that plenty of people get married for reasons other than bearing children. And finally, there are plenty of homosexual couples who raise children together.

Actually this is exactly what marriage is to most people. The fundamental mistake seems rather to be in telling people why they should get married.

Hopefully it's now clear why this is completely wrong.

I have never once in my life refused to associate with a person who is homosexual just because of that. I don't recall ever having said anything derogatory to or about anyone for their being homosexual, although perhaps you think that my just holding Catholic beliefs about the sinfulness of homosexual sexual activity qualifies as derogatory.

You said you disagreed with literally everything I said. I brought up three points that I would have found it hard for you to disagree with. So now you agree with those three points, but deem them irrelevant.

The relevance of those three points to this discussion is that earlier, Turn Prophet said that any argument based on connecting marriage with reproduction had been debunked as nonsense. You are saying you don't see the relevance of the three points that you've conceded to that issue?

A+.

Because modern societies have drifted so far from the original purposes of marriage to try to include secondary purposes doesn't change the original purpose.

Multiplying was a primary directive in the OT. They had Levirate marriages that promoted the birth of more offspring and ownership of the land was tied to Levirate marriage. Look at the Book of Ruth. The closest redeemer couldn't just buy Naomi's dead son's land. He had to marry the widow and provide a heir. Same thing with Tamar and Judah in Genesis.

Thinking somebody is stupid for thinking something else is not bigotry.

It doesn't surprise me that you don't understand marriage, but it does surprise me that you don't know what the original intent of marriage was.

Lol, I'm sure you have many black friends too.

Btw, Catholics denying gays their rights is unbelievably hypocritical to me.