Anti-gay marriage

[NotGotAClue1]

My finance and the father of my young child told me that he doesn’t agree with gay marriage, not being gay in general, just the marriage part. And that it would be better for a child to be raised by a man and a woman. I’m completely offended by this and don’t agree in the slightest. I think he is thinking like a dinosaur and needs to move with the times. He thinks we can have different views and move on. But this has actually changed the way I look at him. He isn’t religious at all which is making me even more confused at his strong views.

AIBU?

Well, it depends. Do you want to marry a bigot?

Personally, I think it's better for children to be raised by parents who are not bigots.

No I don’t but I don’t want to break up my family either.

Maybe to you it’s an ‘odd argument’ but I think we’re coming close to losing our ability to tolerate.

Different things bother different people. There are many marriages where there is dishonesty.

People can have many different qualities some good some bad.

Seeking a marital echo chamber is a great way to breed lies.

These examples of opinions such as black people not being allowed to vote and disabled people should be sterilised are subject to legislation and not comparable to the subject matter.

These examples of opinions such as black people not being allowed to vote and disabled people should be sterilised are subject to legislation and not comparable to the subject matter.

Marriage equality is also something that is subject to legislation and is therefore absolutely comparable. Stripped down to the basics, opposing marriage equality means saying that not everyone should have the same rights and privileges to solemnise their relationship purely because of their sexual orientation. Since sexual orientation isn't a choice, this is no different from saying that black people or disabled people should have fewer rights. Holding such an opinion speaks to someone's (lack of) morals and good character.

@2mummies1baby Religion is a protected group too though and a lot of religions don't take part in same sex relationships and/or marriages due to what it says in the Bible. And that is their right to hold those views.

These examples of opinions such as black people not being allowed to vote and disabled people should be sterilised are subject to legislation and not comparable to the subject matter.

Can you explain why these are not comparable to the subject matter? They are all opinions about the rights other people should have access to, based on a perceived difference.

Wrong way round; or at least, you're disingenuously hung up on the idea of "tolerance".

Bigoted views and outdated legislation that stems from them, both of which have done immeasurable harm to marginalised groups of people, are increasingly not tolerated. And nor should they be. Tolerance is not actually the end point of a decent, civilised society; that's equality and freedom from oppression.

He’s entitled to his opinion. No right or wrong.

People have a right to practise their religion. They do not have a right to use their religion as an excuse to impose restrictions on other people.

The very same section of the bible which condemns male homosexuality (female homosexuality is never mentioned, fyi) also condemns tattoos, eating seafood and wearing clothes made from more than one type of fabric. Would religious people be excused for saying they didn't believe people should get married if they have ever eaten a prawn?

I agree with this and I assume it was an opinion expressed in his own home.

The thing is OP everyone's entitled to their opinion, the important bit is that you don't allow him to "instruct" your child to think the same way but rather teach them that we are all different and that's a good thing; remind him that your little one will be having class mates with two mums/dads as it is actually very common nowadays.

I'm sorry OP, my comment was snidey and flippant because I was annoyed by some of the other replies you've received. I do appreciate the difficult position you're in, and have huge sympathy for you. It must be awful to be finding out now that you have different values. If I were in your shoes and really didn't want to break up the family, I guess there would have to be lots of talking and trying to unpick where his views have come from, and whether he's open to having them challenged.

@2mummies1baby I don't want to derail the thread to a religious one but all those things you mention come under the Mosaic law which Christ abolished with his death. The seafood laws etc no longer apply. Whereas homosexuality was still considered a sin even after Christ.

But on the other point you raise, I completely agree with you, people don't have the right to impose restrictions on other people. Everyone makes their own choices in life and lives how they want to and that is completely their right.

Don’t be ridiculous. One is a crime; the other is not.

@DixonD But if all opinions are allowed....

Carrying out the act would be a crime, as is discriminating against someone based on their sexuality.

Holding an opinion is not a crime and according to many on here all opinions are equally valid. So either that is true or you'll need to concede not all opinions are equal.

What do you mean allowable opinions? You can think any opinion that you like, I can think your opinions are grotesque, I might have nothing to do with you from the moment you expressed that grotesque opinion. But opinions aren't acts of criminality in and of themselves and so they are allowable.

Having sex with a 12 year old is a crime; having the opinion that it's ok to have sex with a 12 year old is not a crime. But we can all agree it's an abhorrent opinion to hold. Therefore, some opinions are not acceptable. You can't stop people from having them, but you don't have to pretend it's ok for them to have such an opinion.

Completely agree. People can think and hold any opinions they want but we don't have to involve ourselves with that person. For example, if someone thought taking drugs was good and had no intention to stop, that is their choice but I wouldn't be friends with them.

Let's just hope that your DC aren't in the 1.5% of the population who are gay, as then it's not much of a problem within your marriage. Maybe have a talk about what you'd do as a couple if your DC ever were to come out. I absolutely wouldn't preemptively divorce due to his opinion, but would be nice to iron out some details in case anything were to occur in future.

That doesn’t answer the question.

Besides there are plenty of religious people who agree with gay marriage.

However, my question was about whether it was ok , in your opinion, for religious people to hold those opinions.

There is a difference between ‘opposing’ something and having an opinion that disagrees with it.

OP’s fiancés opinion cannot stop a black person voting.

His opinion cannot sterilise a disabled person.

I'm very confused... his opinion also can't stop gay people getting married?

If his opinion was that black people shouldn't be allowed to vote or that disabled people should be sterilised, would you still say it's a valid opinion?