Gay rights has always been something that I’ve believed in. I know that most people would assume that I’m only a supporter of them because so many of the bands that I like support it and therefore so do I, but that’s not the case. I’ve always felt this way. And no, it’s not because I was ‘brainwashed’ by my parents because I have one parent (my dad) that is against gay rights and one (my mom) that is for them. The way I see it is that if you’re a girl and want to marry a boy that’s cool, normal no one will give you a second glance for saying so they just smile at the announcement of your wedding or what have you because it’s not their business and frankly they probably don’t really care. But if you’re a girl that wants to marry another girl then suddenly it’s everyone’s business and you’re, in some cases, considered to be vile or to have some psychological problem. But let’s pretend that you do have some mental issue and you’re a lesbian, it still should matter, it still shouldn’t factor into if you can marry your girlfriend or not because it’s your life, not the government’s so who are they to say that you can’t marry your girlfriend?

One of the main reasons that I hear for people thinking that gay rights are wrong is that the Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman. But the Bible also says that you must be a virgin when you get married, not to get tattoos, not to shave, and many other things that we now consider normal in our culture so why are so hung up on this issue? Especially if the legalization of gay marriage won’t effect 99% of the people that you see standing with their picket signs. And even if you want to say something about how ‘just because one law was broken doesn’t mean that they all should be’ don’t bother, because the laws in the Old Testament are for the people that lived then. God had his reasons for putting them into place but those laws were no longer necessary when Jesus died on the cross, just like animal sacrifice.

Another thing that I see that really annoys me is when people say that gays chose to be that way and they could go back to ‘normal’ whenever they choose. This is not true. Because why, and I mean absolutely no offense to anyone gay, would someone choose to be gay? You see the horrid things that people do to outed kids in high school and why would someone choose to go though that torture. And no I’m not saying that all schools are like that, but unfortunately some are. People are born gay. It’s as simple as that. There’s not anything you can do about it, besides deny it to everyone, including yourself. No I don’t have any substantial proof but when you look at identical twins, like Tegan and Sara Quinn, who are both gay doesn’t it make more sense that it’s because, at one point, they were the same fetus than to believe that they both choose to be gay? Especially when you look at the chances of being at an identical twin and be gay? To put it into prospective you have about a good of a chance of being gay as you do being left handed.

That is all thank you for taking the time to read this.

fueledbypeterick:

sherlocked-inside-the-tardis:

stephnrice:

glassmountain:

stfuconservatives:

nextyearsgirl:

This is an enormous chain and I’m sorry, but I need to say this:

The laws in the Old Testament were set forth by god as the rules the Hebrews needed to follow in order to be righteous, to atone for the sin of Adam and Eve and to be able to get into Heaven. That is also why they were required to make sacrifices, because it was part of the appeasement for Original Sin.

According to Christian theology, when Jesus came from Heaven, it was for the express purpose of sacrificing himself on the cross so that our sins may be forgiven. His sacrifice was supposed to be the ultimate act that would free us from the former laws and regulations and allow us to enter Heaven by acting in his image. That is why he said “it is finished” when he died on the cross. That is why Christians don’t have to circumcise their sons (god’s covenant with Jacob), that is why they don’t have to perform animal sacrifice, or grow out their forelocks, or follow any of the other laws of Leviticus.

When you quote Leviticus as god’s law and say they are rules we must follow because they are what god or Jesus wants us to do, what you are really saying, as a Christian, is that Christ’s sacrifice on the cross was invalid. He died in vain because you believe we are still beholden to the old laws. That is what you, a self-professed good Christian, are saying to your god and his son, that their plan for your salvation wasn’t good enough for you.

So maybe actually read the thing before you start quoting it, because the implications of your actions go a lot deeper than you think.

/An atheist who understands Christian theology better than Bible-thumpers do.

^

(mic drop)

boom

whoa.

I TOLD YOU I WAS RIGHT YOU ALL WERE WRONG BOOM

blazethenation:

THIS

gene-allen:

angelic-collapse:

oblivi4te:

deadly-whale:

thelittlewarblette:

toturnonthelights:

from left to right;

I am afraid to hold my boyfriend’s hand.

My friend’s parents sent her away.

I found death threats in my locker.

I submitted to electroshock therapy.

I lost half my friends after coming out.

My grandmother sends me hate mail.

My school won’t let me take my date to prom.

I am not here anymore.

My dad tried to beat it out of me.

No one is proud of me.

This showed up on my blog again. Forever reblog.

The “I am not here anymore.” broke my heart.

if you are a homophobe……kindly fuck off and unfollow me :) thanks

forever reblog

Exactly what they said ^^
I am bisexual & no one has the right to tell me that I am wrong or who I love is wrong.
Forever reblog!

My friends father won’t let her hangout with me because im gay

peteandpatrick:

mychemnarglesfalloutatthedisco:

jaredgertner:

notobvioustome:

enigmaticrose:

kittycuddler69:

causeimstaringatyou:

hotpinkbandit:

I created a same sex marriage map:

-black: ban on same sex marriage

-translucent flag: civil unions or domestic partnerships for same sex couples

-opaque flag: marriage equality

I never realized it was this bad! 

Sad.

IOWA

We might not allow same-sex marriage, but there is something: there are cities in Minnesota that have domestic partnership registries. So. That’s something. It’s not grand, but it’s something. 

It’s just a reminder of how I live in my little rainbow bubble of MA and NY. I really wish that bubble would just pop and explode onto everything, creating opaque rainbows all around the world.

this is just really sad

stupid america

ep1c:

the-story-so-fart:

Had to reblog this, want it so much. 

even though i’m straight i agree with this completely. especially the AIDS part. it came from a guy who fucked a monkey, not a guy who fucked another guy.

First off, there’s the argument that gay marriage will destroy the ‘sanctity’ of marriage. This is entirely false- if anything, the concept of divorce destroyed the sanctity of marriage a long time ago. About half of all marriages in the U.S. end in divorce. Literally, with any straight marriage, you might as well flip a coin to see if you’re going to stay together. ‘Til death do us part’ means almost nothing anymore, all because of divorce. Gay marriage will, if anything, probably bring the rate of divorce down. There’s also the argument, “Marriage is between a man and a women, it says so in the Bible.” Last time I checked, America was founded on the Constitution, not the Bible. Literally anything the Bible says has NO standing when it comes to making laws- separation of church and state, right? Making gay marriage illegal is favoring Christianity, which is unconstitutional. First amendment, look it up.

Gay adoption. Well, for the generation preceding ours, it’s a bit too weird of a concept to allow gay couples to raise kids. However, that doesn’t mean they can pull out the old excuse- “children need both a male and female role model growing up”. This is entirely untrue- single parents raise kids just fine, and it’s been tested: gay couples can raise completely straight, cisgender kids. The fact that a child is raised by a gay couples has NO effect on their gender or sexual preference. Besides, children don’t have to find a role model in their parents- there are straight couples with kids that make really shitty role models. Good role models can be found anywhere- in a good teacher, a celebrity, an older brother or sister, hell, even a friend. Gay couples should have every right to have kids, whether it be through a surrogate or adoption. There are too many orphans in the world anyway, letting gays adopt would increase the number of children adopted into loving homes, which is entirely good.

Don’t ask, don’t tell. Any man, women, or variation thereof that is brave enough to sacrifice their safety to travel to one of the most dangerous parts of the world to fight in the name of their country has my respect. I’m not a fan of this so called “War on Terror”, but that doesn’t change the sacrifice our troops go through for our safety.

There are places in the world where people can be put to death for being gay. America needs to work on their acceptance, and treating people the way they deserve to be treated. Like goddamn human beings.

The Greeks thought that homosexuality was more pure than heterosexuality, because one of the main purposes of heterosexuality is the option of reproduction. The Greeks considered heterosexuals desire for only this to be greedy, where as homosexual love is more about true love for the other person, not just the desire to reproduce. Also, because homosexual love isn’t the dominant culture. It’s different.

Just some thoughts on the historical development of marriage, status of women, its effect on same-sex marriage and the arguments for it and against.

Society is what we make of it. It is a reflection of our time. This is why same-sex marriage should not only be legal but be supported and encouraged everywhere.

But same-sex marriage is objected to by many, even if it clearly is only a matter of time in the Western world. Surely by now it has been established that same-sex marriage can not be opposed to on religious grounds - homosexuality is hardly discussed in the Bible, same-sex marriage is certainly not mentioned. And even the so-perceived condemnation of homosexuality is highly questionable. The terms used are foreign to us, describing a society long since lost. Whatever the Bible discusses, it most certainly is not what we consider to be “a homosexual”.

Yet, the Bible does claim that a union is between a man and a woman. Yes, Christian fundamentalists rejoice there.

But of course it’s between a man and a woman. There was no need for an ancient society to establish male-male marriages. Failure to understand this is failing to understand history. And, one should never forget, marriage was gradually Christianised in the High Middle Ages. It took centuries for the kind of Christian marriage that we know to develop.

Same-sex voices aren’t non-existent in marital history. We have sporadic evidence of same-sex marriage amongst Romans and we have confusing special bond ceremonies between male Orthodox Christians during the Middle Ages. Even so, there is no consistent historic backing for same-sex marriage, and I find this argument a lot more convincing for the anti-groups than any religious or reproductive reasoning. Sadly, these people tend to be ignorant of history and don’t realise where their best battleground could be.

Yet they would be too rushed to now rejoice a second time: willfully misinterpreting the Bible and historic facts? Whoo, no one can stop us now!

Hold your horses there.

Why isn’t same-sex marriage historical? When we look to the story of marriage, we are looking at shifting societies from the lifetime of Christ up to recent history. Remember the times when people of different races weren’t allowed to marry? You know, sixty years ago?

A lot has changed, certainly, but perhaps most relevant for us is the role and status of women. For, indeed, it was the inferiority of woman that made marriages so crucial in the past and it has been the equality between genders that has enabled same-sex marriage to even become a conversation topic.

Historically, a woman was property. She needed to be under male control. She needed to be married. A woman gave birth to children, and if we look at medieval societies in Europe, many of them rural, it was absolutely essential for the survival of a community that children had parents that looked after them, that there was no bastard children who were someone else’s problem. Marriage was fundamental in legal and social terms. Marriage was the central building block of a patriarchal society because of reproduction and female weakness.

Now take two men madly in love, living in this same society. Indeed, what reason was there for them to marry or wish to have something akin to marriage? Neither needed to legally be controlled by someone. There was no danger of children or worry of who would look after their offspring if their union wasn’t formal. Legally, what could they hope to gain? A woman’s property was her husband’s as she could not own anything of her own. There was no extra security or extra benefits that any kind of same-sex union could have given two men or two women.

But as society has developed, women are no longer subjects that need to be controlled. Women are equal to men, even if it doesn’t quite show in our paychecks yet. However, most would hopefully agree that women are not property, do not need to be controlled and that they do not need to be married. With the success of women’s rights, marriage changes. It is about equals who share equal rights, it is not a husband with his property (inc. wife).

And when the inequality within marriage itself disappeared, same-sex marriage rears its head. Now there are benefits and security to be gained. Now there is a valid reason for two men or two women to want something that has almost always been a heterosexual affair.

Therefore, sadly for bigots, history is of no help. History and a look at past societies, gender roles and gender ideas explains why same-sex marriage is a new phenomenon (even if Romans had it too): there was no need for same-sex marriage before. The inequality of man/woman ensured that there was nothing one could gain from a same-sex union as far as society, culture, law, security, rights were concerned.

And for us who support same-sex marriage, history shows why we need it now. When marriage is between two equals to live their lives together, to support and care for each other, gender roles and the sex of the two people involved becomes irrelevant. And history beyond all else shows that societies are a reflection of the times, of the wants and needs of contemporary people.

And same-sex marriage is what we need and want now. In this time. For equal citizens.