This Newsweek Article provides some interesting food for thought...Go read it. I'll wait.
Ok good. I think this section is particularly interesting:
If the bible doesn't give abundant examples of traditional marriage, then what are the gay-marriage opponents really exercised about? Well, homosexuality, of course—specifically sex between men. Sex between women has never, even in biblical times, raised as much ire. In its entry on "Homosexual Practices," the Anchor Bible Dictionary notes that nowhere in the Bible do its authors refer to sex between women, "possibly because it did not result in true physical 'union' (by male entry)."
The Bible does condemn gay male sex in a handful of passages. Twice Leviticus refers to sex between men as "an abomination" (King James version), but these are throwaway lines in a peculiar text given over to codes for living in the ancient Jewish world, a text that devotes verse after verse to treatments for leprosy, cleanliness rituals for menstruating women and the correct way to sacrifice a goat—or a lamb or a turtle dove. Most of us no longer heed Leviticus on haircuts or blood sacrifices; our modern understanding of the world has surpassed its prescriptions. Why would we regard its condemnation of homosexuality with more seriousness than we regard its advice, which is far lengthier, on the best price to pay for a slave?
Indeed...it does seem that people pick and choose what biblical passages apply to them and what doesn't...not only on this issue but also on others. Maybe I have a skewed perspective as someone who has no religious affiliation or inclinations? (I was raised Catholic but left the church as soon as humanly possible- 14yrs old and have never looked back.) I just wonder how someone justifies adhering to passages calling sex between men as an "abomination" but chooses to ignore those about sacrificing goats, having more than one wife, owning slaves, etc....am I missing something here??