I am writing about marriage equality for homosexuals. I have read a lot of letters to the newspaper detesting homosexuality and its legalization with constant use of the terms "abomination" and "sin." I think this is a hypocritical statement. Let me explain.

On the matter of marriage equality for same-sex partners, I can say with honesty that I didn't care or think too much of it before the Supreme Court ruling, but I do agree with the ruling. What I'm more interested in is the way the discussion is held, which in my opinion is an unfair argument.

For someone to say that homosexuals are sinners, while the accuser throws a football, eats bacon, has her hair braided, or enjoys wearing a gold or pearl necklace, is hypocritical. If one wants to point to the book of Leviticus as proof that being gay is a sin, I surely hope that those individuals don't eat lobster, crab or clams, as "any thing in the water that is scale-less or finless is an abomination unto you" as in Leviticus 11:12.

If a woman tells homosexuals that they are sinners while she wears a gold necklace, then she obviously haven't read 1 Timothy 2:9: "Women shall dress modestly, with shamefacedness, not with braided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array." Or Deuteronomy 22:5: "Women are not to wear men's clothing and vice versa, it's an abomination unto the lord." Are you wearing your husband's flannel right now? You're a sinner. Gold necklace or pearls? Also a sinner. Galatians 5:20-21 makes an argument that idol worshipping (crosses, sculptures,etc.) will keep you from heaven.

You like eating bacon with breakfast? Isaiah 66:17. The swine is detested by God. Touching the skin of the swine is frowned upon. No more throwing the ole pigskin in the backyard with little Jimmy, according to Leviticus 11:7-8.

If one wants to take a fundamental view of scripture, then do you believe that a rape victim who does not scream loud enough during the rape deserves to be stoned to death by all males of the city? Deuteronomy 22:23-24.

So now I come back to my original statement. It's hypocritical to say that gay is a sin. Clearly there are people of faith who are sinning as well and maybe aren't even aware of it. If said individuals are aware of the sin, then is there cherry-picking involved in what constitutes a sin? Are we allowed to pick what sin we acknowledge and what sin we ignore? Is that fair in a discussion about individual rights or in any discussion pertaining to someone's character? Is it fair when discussing someone's place in society or whether they are a good, morally sound person, deemed by society's standards?

I don't think so. I thinks it's unfair for anybody to tell homosexuals that they are sinners and then try to back it up with scripture, all while ignoring the fact that they themselves have or are currently sinning. It's easier in this case to just say that you don't like seeing two people of the same sex kiss or hold hands. And if you want to say that legalization of gay marriage put family values at risk, I defy you to prove to me that statement is correct and factual. Churches still have the right to turn away marrying same-sex couples, as they should. It's their right to and I agree with that. But again, why not just admit you don't like looking or hearing about it because it makes you uneasy?

So I put the question out. Is cherry-picking involved in what sins we like or dislike? Without referring to scripture, can anyone tell me why? If the word of God is infallible and supreme, then why eat bacon or shellfish, why wear gold and why do we throw the football so much? Maybe it's time to stop calling people sinners and look into what God considers a sin. It seems to me not too many people have a correct definition of the term.

Corey Craig is a Hayden resident.