Dr. Dobson's Marriage Under Fire

Greater social acceptance of homosexuality along with legalization of gay marriage might produce more happiness for homosexuals. Moreover, if gay marriage were legalized throughout the country, then the full benefits of marriage would be extended to homosexuals, including benefits for Married couples that are obtained through tax policy, insurance coverage, and inheritance law. One of the most common non-consequentialist arguments against homosexual sex is that it is Unnatural, which it goes against nature. Natural law arguments against homosexuality And same-sex marriage have often traditionally been grounded in religious viewpoints on sexuality and the sanctity of heterosexual marriage. For example, many Christians and Jews who denounce homosexuality do so on the basis of Old Testament Bible verses such The Old Testament appears to permit polygamy. And the New Testament prohibits divorce. If we reject gay marriage on biblical grounds, should we also reject divorce and permit

With gay marriage becoming an increasingly popular discussion topic there exist constant feuding between which is right or not. We must think through it logically and ask ourselves: how does a homosexual couple not constitute as much of a family as a heterosexual couple? Gay marriage in American culture but more closely religious culture is primarily not accepted but in Evan Wolfson’s “What is Marriage”, what really constitutes a marriage these days

Recently, people have been arguing with respect to the definition of marriage. To get married is a very important event for almost everyone. Particularly for women, marriage and giving a birth could be the two major events of their lives. Andrew Sullivan and William Bennett are authors who are arguing about homosexual marriage. Sullivan believes in same-sex marriage because he thinks everyone has a right to marry. On the other hand, Bennett speaks out against Sullivan’s opinion. Bennett makes a claim that marriage is between a man and a woman structuring their entire life together. Both authors’ opinions differ on same-sex marriage. Nevertheless, their ideas are well recognized.

In recent years, the debate over same-sex marriage has grown into a nationwide controversy, reverberating into the halls of congress, at the white house, in dozens of state and legislature and courtrooms, and in the rhetoric of election campaigns at both the national and state levels. As the debate rages on, the American religious community remains deeply divided over the issue, and over the morality of homosexuality. The debate has grown from an issue that occasionally arose in a few states to a national and even worldwide controversy.

For the past 3 decades the views surrounding marriage has undergone a great deal of change (Lennox, 2015, p. 1101). This shift is due to the continual discussion of gay marriage. The interplay of religion and politics has led for much controversy. In the United States, the use of Christian and Jewish biblical texts are the main sources drawn upon for opposition, but have also been used as a supportive means of equality. Beyond the religious there are also psychological and physical health arguments, as well as civil rights arguments. Same sex marriage is examined through different paradigms, thus giving rise to religious, political/legal, and religious arguments surrounding the legalization of this institution for gay and lesbian couples.

Miller demonstrates in “Our Mutual Joy: The Religious Case for Gay Marriage” the importance in Scripture concerning gay marriage and why it isn’t necessarily valid in all arguments. The gay community suffers biblical scrutiny at all times because there are people, and whole communities such as churches, who don’t agree with their sexual orientation. Miller defends this community by comparing it to a heterosexual marriage because after all, it isn’t any different. “More basic than theology, though, is human need.” (Miller). What any person wants is to love and to be loved; why should this be exclusive to only heterosexuals? Using statistics to prove her points, she turns to a poll: “(In the Newsweek poll, 55 percent of respondents said that married heterosexuals who have sex with someone other than their spouses are more morally objectionable than a gay couple in a committed sexual relationship.)” (Miller). This shows how the idea of marriage has changed. Miller also compares old traditions that are presently

On June 26th, 2015, the United States Supreme Court voted to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide and in doing so, rattled the belief system of many Christians around the country. Many took to social media and with the terror and panic of Chicken Little cried, “The sky is falling”, while others lashed out in hateful speech towards the lawmakers and the homosexual community that celebrated their newly given liberty. As Christians begin to look toward the future with a new definition of marriage put into effect before the country, many begin to question what this will mean for the next generation of believers and for the church moving forward. While the federal government may revise the definition of marriage, as outlined in the constitution, it does not have the ability to change the truth of scripture or the definition of marriage outlines within.

Dr. Andreas Kostenberger is the Director of PhD Studies and Professor of New Testament at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. Dr. Kostenberger uses the Word of God from the Old and New Testament on marriage, gender roles, headship, sex, child-rearing, divorce, and homosexuality. In the second edition of God, Marriage, and Family, by Köstenberger and Jones investigate the most recent contentions, social movements, and teachings inside both the congregation and society and further apply Scripture 's immortal standards to contemporary issues. We live in a time period of a crisis in regards to marriage and the family, and the only way the institution of marriage can be rebuild is by the biblical foundation in the Word of

Debates about gay marriage continue to simmer within American public discourse, though much of the more heated rhetoric has calmed since the earliest efforts to legalize same-sex marriage succeeded in numerous states. These debates have spanned many topics, ranging from religion to politics and beyond. Andrew Sullivan, a prominent gay and self-described conservative political commentator, addressed one angle of the issue in his July 19, 2011 Newsweek Magazine article “Why Gay Marriage is Good for America.” Through a mixture of personal reflection, social commentary, and political argumentation, Sullivan’s article is less a defense of gay marriage than it is a defense of the idea that gay marriage is compatible with conservative political values. Although Sullivan makes a good case for his position in the article, his argument is ultimately under-developed; the lengthy personal reflections serve to reinforce a relatively minor point in the context of the larger argument, shifting focus away from the more relevant portions of the argument.

Critique of Bennett’s “Against Gay Marriage” Gay marriage is repeatedly under the magnifying glass in the media, the papers, and constantly opposed by adamant conservative politicians. In his piece “Against Gay Marriage,” Bennett demonstrates this issue. William Bennett himself is a married conservative politician. Due to this, we can better understand the flailing urgency of his argument against homosexual marriage. Bennett takes a very strong and adamant approach to what is a particularly sensitive subject at this moment in time, and leaps into act of persuading his audience to turn away from the idea of legalizing gay marriage, or even to reject it.

The two texts examined within, present the opposing extremes of views regarding gay and lesbian marriage. The first text entitled Let Gays Marry by Andrew Sullivan examines the intricacies of same sex relationships and why homosexual couples should be allowed to publicly show affection for one another. The second text that will be examined is titled Leave Marriage Alone written by William Bennett. Bennett gives his views on why couples of same sex nature should not be allowed to engage in marital relations. These two authors, although very different, each has a view of the ideals of marriage, and how it should be presented to the public.

Same sex marriage is one of the most controversial trends that appear in the world today. In today’s society most of us are taught that a marriage should be a

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage is a legal contract between a man and a woman. It is the institution that establishes kinship and relations in the family. Marriage is mostly recognized by a state, organization, religious authority, local community, or peers. Marriage is for procreation, education, the unity, and well-being of the couple. Some say marriage is for two people who love each other and ready for commitment. Nevertheless, in the bible times, couples were not allowed to choose the one him or her married. Therefore, the person he or she married was not the person him or her loved. Divorce was not an option; the couples had to learn to love the person they married. Stating this, marriage is not all about love and emotions, but the purpose of marriage. Marriage is unique and universal. (Rauch) Marriage of homosexual couples would not provide the same benefits of a heterosexual couple. Homosexual are not allowed to produce children. They must have vitro-fertilization or surrogacy. Same-sex couples should not be allowed to marry, because marriage is for a man and a woman, all religion is against gay marriages, and gay marriages are the slippery slope for other marriages. (Ferguson)

As we know, same-sex marriage has been discussed and argued for a long time. Within the controversial topic of gay rights, there’s no area more controversial than same-sex marriage. And all of us ask ourselves if same-sex marriage should be legal or not. But the fact is that we have to start thinking about it as a moral and religious topic. The government shouldn’t legalize the same-sex marriage because the

One of the most controversial issues around today is gay marriages. Many believe that the media is primly responsible for the idea of same-sex marriages, but when it all comes down to it there are really only two sides; those who support gay marriages, and those who oppose them. Two authors write their opinions on their opposite views on this issue. Sullivan (2002) supports same-sex marriages and believes marriage to be a universal right, not just restricted to heterosexuals. Contrary to Sullivan, Bennett (2002) believes that marriage is a sacred traditional family value that should be set aside for heterosexual couples. (2002)Throughout this essay, I will summarize both authors’ ideas and evaluate them through their evidence and