False assertion #1: Marriage has always been between a man and a woman.

There were periods in European history – e.g. the early Roman era – when homosexual unions were officially sanctioned. In some periods of Chinese history there were states (e.g. Fujian) which sanctioned homosexual unions.

There are many nations today where homosexual marriages are legal.

False assertion #2: Christianity opposes homosexual marriage.

A substantial and growing number of churches in many countries of the world now bless homosexual unions, some even administering the full sacrament of marriage.

False assertion #3: Marriage is for creating children.

If this is used as a basic religious principle for eschewing homosexual marriage it must also be applied to heterosexual marriage. The principle would mean that people who marry and decide not to have children should be shunned and shamed. If adopting children would make the marriage acceptable, then this principle in turn would legitimise a homosexual marriage under which the couple adopted children.

I predict that, like ordination of openly homosexual men and women to the priesthood and their consecration as bishops, homosexual marriage will gradually be recognised in the churches as blessed by God and a blessing to the world. It is happening now and will grow.

"A German brother and sister are challenging the law against incest so that they can continue their relationship free from the threat of imprisonment.
Patrick Stübing, an unemployed locksmith, and his sister Susan have had four children together since starting a sexual relationship in 2000. Three of the children are in foster care, and two have unspecified disabilities.

The couple, who live near Leipzig, grew up separately and only met many years later. Their supporters say they will fight until incest is no longer regarded as a criminal offence, arguing that the law is out of date. They say it harks back to the racial hygiene laws of the Third Reich and should be overturned in favour of freedom of choice and sexual determination."
http://www.geneticsexualattraction.com/index.php?pageid=1

I'm sure I've heard that argument before:

People of diverse sexual preferences should enjoy social inclusion and freedom from discrimination.

Isn't that what the homosexual lobby have be demanding for years?

These various groups of diverse sexual preferences obviously make ideal bedfellows but for some reason homosexual activists won't extend to others the same benefits they demand for themselves.

Hypocrites or just selfish pragmatists?

Proxy nobody is stopping you having an incestuous relationship, just make sure your relative is consenting!!

I knew it.
You DO advocate incestuous relationships.

@crabsy

Correct Assertion #1: Marriage has always been between a man and a woman.

1 + 1 /= 3 - just because there have been places and times that have sanctioned homosexual unions doesn't mean that the institution of marriage hasn't been about man & a woman creating a family

Correct Assertion #2: God opposes homosexual marriage (read the Bible) thus Christians oppose homosexual marriage.

Much of Western 'Christianity' is no such thing. Christians are by definition, followers of Christ, and for that to be so must adhere to the teachings in the Bible which include: homosexuality is a sin and called an abhorrence to God.

Once again, just because there are some people getting about in priest frocks calling themselves Christian doesn't mean that they are, or that the denominations which allow them to do so are representatives of Christ. Much heresy abounds in the west.

You can certainly be forgiven for mistaking what goes about today for Christianity, because there is little Christ-likeness to show in all of it. As Ghandi said (something to this effect) "I like Christ. I don't like his Christians". Much has been done in God's name (Spanish Inquisition etc.) that is just the opposite of what is preached in the Bible. God yearns for real relationship with his children but on His terms since He's the creator - sin is the sticking point and must be dealbt with first (hence the Christ).

Correct assertion #3: Marriage is for providing a safe, stable & secure environment for wife and offspring, and the God-sanctioned arena for sexual expression.

It has repeatedly been shown through countless studies that societies work best when the institution of marriage is protected and upheld for the good of people and their offspring.

Just because a few people choose not to have children does not invalidate this.

When a person has a lack of self esteem and being, why do they use the extreme elements of religion and other members of the community, to make up for their personal insecurities?