she thinks it is weird.....un natural?
Yes, my relative thinks its unnatural. She's also kind of racist and not very knowledgeable about things in general. I wouldn't use her as an example of knowledgeable discernment.
I really am trying to be fair and understanding, especially now that my loved one has labeled herself gay. Though she has not committed any act as of yet, she says she knows where her attractions lay. She has always been opposed to any femininity, refusing to wear girlie clothes, do her hair and her best friend growing up has been her boy cousin. Other people have suspected, but I was blind to any possibility I guess. So really I don't know how to handle this in a loving and supporting way without going against my own beliefs in the process.I had mentioned her having children and she Got kind of hostile saying if Romney has any power then that possibility is out of the question, to which I laughingly replied, Oh Lord now your a liberal too!!
Sincerely I need to learn how to accept without acquiescing, and I need to be there for her in the hardships she will inevitably face. I wish so much to protect her from any hate but I need to be sure I am not one she needs protection from.....
It's good that you want to protect her and that you're introspective enough to make sure you're treating her well.
So really I don't know how to handle this in a loving and supporting way without going against my own beliefs in the process.
I think a key thing to keep in mind is that your beliefs don't necessarily have to be unchanging if you learn new facts about a topic. A healthy belief should be subject to change if the facts lead a certain way.
I think too many people think along the lines of, "Here's my conclusion, now what are the facts?" rather than "What are the facts, so I can form a tentative conclusion?"
Here are some things worth noting, in no particular order:
-Psychologists do not classify homosexuality as unnatural or a disorder. Decades ago, the American Psychiatric Association considered it to be, but over time it was found that practically no evidence supports that it is a disorder and that evidence indicates it is not. So for 40 years now, it has not been considered a disorder in professional circles. It's considered a normal variation on human sexuality. The World Health Organization also does not include it as a disorder or unnatural. So there's a divide in the general public's opinion but in professional circles there really isn't any big debate here.
-Homosexuality occurs in many species, not just humans.
-The national debate about gay marriage is about legal marriage, not religious marriage. The vast majority of people that are in support of gay marriage just want identical legal marriage for consenting adults. They don't want to tell churches or temples or other religious organizations that they have to marry gay couples, because legally, a church-wedding is just a tradition with no legal bearing.
-Personal beliefs about what kinds of sexual acts are moral or not should be considered somewhat independently from the law. We shouldn't form our opinions into law. Laws protect people, but if there is no strong argument for restricting people's rights, then their rights shouldn't be restricted. It's okay to be personally against something while being legally in favor of it. There's all sorts of things I find personally wrong that I don't want to put into law. Like I think cheating on a partner is terrible, but I don't want to make it a crime. That's for the partners to sort out.
-Religion is not a basis for developing laws in the U.S.. Based on the Constitution and the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Constitution, any law must reflect a genuine need rather than something based substantially on religious views. As I pointed out in a previous post, the vast majority of non-religious people support legal gay marriage.
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/3136196-post130.html So people's religion seems to play a large role in desiring to interfere with decisions between consenting adults without a basis in secular law.
-Imagine you're exclusively attracted to women. Now if you had your existing religion still in that scenario, perhaps you'd have internal struggles about what that means and you'd have to work that out. But suppose that in a scenario, it's a religion you don't believe in that seeks to impair your ability to form a loving partnership with people you fall in love with. They seek to make it unlawful to marry who you want to marry, and cite a book like a Qu'ran or something as justification for this despite the fact that you live in a country where religion is not allowed to be a basis for laws. Or they just say they don't like it or think it's weird, and use that as a basis for law, despite the position by professionals that it is not unnatural. You'd likely be pretty bothered by such people. Or consider an alternative example where people and their holy books say that eating meat is wrong and leads to a hellish punishment, and then seeks to not allow you to eat meat because of that. You'd probably argue that this is not a basis for law.
-You say you know what God says, but do you? Are you sure? Can your position on this matter change? What basis do you have to believe that God is against homosexuality? Paul apparently said it. The author of Leviticus said it. Is that the primary basis for your belief? People in Leviticus were also against eating shellfish and wearing mixed fabrics and lived over 2,000 years ago without the research we have on topics like this. And Paul was a man who wrote letters. If the opinions of those men are your basis for believing that your god is against homosexuality, is it that solid of a belief?