Banning Gay Marriage Is Not "The" Answer (by Chad Thompson)

[Now You See HIM]

CT posted this piece earlier today; I can't post the actual text, but here are the subhead and the writer's credit, to go with the link...

(P.S.: In case you're wondering about the quotes in the thread title, they represent the use of italics in the actual article title.)

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/135/22.0.html

Legal actions aren't loving if they're all we do, says the author of Loving Homosexuals as Jesus Would.

Chad Thompson is an author, speaker, and founder of Inqueery [Inqueery.com], an organization that addresses homosexuality on high school and college campuses. This article is adapted from Thompson's upcoming book, Loving Homosexuals as Jesus Would: A Fresh Christian Approach (Brazos, November). For more information visit LovingHomosexuals.com.

[Jiggy37]

That was one of the best articles I've ever read about the situation, and should be required reading for all Christians, I think, as to why most Christian attempts to witness to homosexual people fails.
Since you didn't post the text, I won't either (under the assumption that I'm not supposed to), but I sincerely wish I could.
Let me just say that I think everyone should, at the very least, do a Find (Ctrl+F) on "But if" and "Can you" (I hope that's not posting too much of the article :lol) and read those two sentences.

[Caveman]

One day at City Hall in San Francisco...

"Next."


Good morning. We want to apply for a marriage license."

""Names?"

"Tim and Jim Jones."

"Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance."

"Yes, we're brothers."

"Brothers? You can't get married."

"Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"

"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"

"Incest?" No, we are not gay."

"Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?"

"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other.
Besides, we don't have any other prospects."

"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've
been denied equal protection under the law. If you are not gay, you
can get married to a woman."

"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I
have. But just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a
woman. I want to marry Jim."

"And I want to marry Tim, Are you going to discriminate against us
just because we are not gay?"

"All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."

"Hi. We are here to get married."

"Names?"

"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."

"Who wants to marry whom?"

"We all want to marry each other."

"But there are four of you!"

"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert,
Jane loves me and June, June loves Robert and Jane, and Robert loves
June
and me. All of us getting married together is the only way that we can
express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."

"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."

"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"

"No, it's just that, well, the traditional idea of marriage is that
it's just for couples."

"Since when are you standing on tradition?"

"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."

"Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples.
The more the better. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the
constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a
marriage license!"

"All right, all right. Next."

"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."

"In what names?"

"David Deets."

"And the other man?"

"That's all. I want to marry myself."

"Marry yourself? What do you mean?"

"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income-tax return."

"That does it! I quit!! You people are making a mockery of marriage!!"