What if the religious right really did hate Gays and Lesbians?

[Quiddity]

We won't give up, though. There is a clear violation of our rights in progress, and it isn't going to cease to bother us. Within ten years, gays and lesbians will have equal access to marriage from coast to coast. Three years ago, I predicted gay marriage within the decade. I've rarely been off the mark in these matters. In twenty years, people like you will be considered on the same order as Aryan Nations, and you won't be able to show your faces in public. I'd gladly throw the first egg.

I'm glad I know better then to extend such behaivor to the entire homosexual community. I'm willing to bet this is just a small fundie community that would do this.

 

[Flappycat]

I'm glad I know better then to extend such behaivor to the entire homosexual community. I'm willing to bet this is just a small fundie community that would do this.

Wait a few years. You won't be able to even voice your views without risking censure, and it might even cost you a job. I can point out to you a few signs that we're heading in that direction if you wish.

 

[Jaymes]

It's not!
Perhaps you meant "it's not only religious anymore"....?

It can be made religious but it is not, by nature, religious any more than turning 13 is.

 

[Quiddity]

Wait a few years. You won't be able to even voice your views without risking censure, and it might even cost you a job. I can point out to you a few signs that we're heading in that direction if you wish.

No thanks Magneto. Nothing my religion hasn't gone through before.

 

[Quiddity]

It can be made religious but it is not, by nature, religious any more than turning 13 is.

Made? It already is religious. Has been for a long time. There is nothing to "make".

 

[Jaymes]

Made? It already is religious. Has been for a long time. There is nothing to "make".

It's not in our society, though. You don't specifically have to opt out of going to a church to get married; you have to opt into it. To me that means it's not religious.

 

[McBell]

Made? It already is religious. Has been for a long time. There is nothing to "make".

Marriage hasn't been religious since the courts took over.
When did the courts take over?
Good question.
Perhaps someone has already done the research and can tell us when the marriage license started.
Marriage is a legal contract, plain and simple.
If you want to make it more than a legal contract by including religion, fine and dandy, but the bottom line is that without the legal part, the marriage is not valid.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Many Christians, many of whome are gay, are very offended that people like you feel you have a right to forbid them to practice their own religion. It is truly none of your business. Goose-stepping conservatives like you have no business directing the religious practices of other churches. It is a gross and immoral violation of their religious freedom. The middle ground is allowing people of different faiths to practice according to their own beliefs.

Nice rhetoric, I don't see your argument changing too many laws in the future. By the way, there is no "E" in whom.

They're still not the exact same rights, though. It is a violation of their religious freedom to bar them from marrying according to their own beliefs in their own religious institutions. This is not a theocracy, no matter how dearly you may wish it was. You are in the wrong.

Saying it don't make it so.

We won't give up, though. There is a clear violation of our rights in progress, and it isn't going to cease to bother us. Within ten years, gays and lesbians will have equal access to marriage from coast to coast. Three years ago, I predicted gay marriage within the decade. I've rarely been off the mark in these matters. In twenty years, people like you will be considered on the same order as Aryan Nations, and you won't be able to show your faces in public. I'd gladly throw the first egg.

You will most likely see a set back with your agenda. Many democrats are shying away from gay issues or do you read the news? They know to get elected, they will have to back away from this.

No. Giving in would lead to a return to the sodomy laws, persecution, and marginalization. We're not buying it. We're not going back to that crap. It was too horrible.

There are still sodomy laws on the books in some states. Just because they are not enforced does not mean they all are abolished. Sodomy laws cannot return until they leave, Duh!

There will be no appeasement.

And gay marriage will have a long hard road ahead of it. I see more legislation defining marriage. The more this issue is pushed, the more laws will be enacted.

I can see we are having a circular conversation and we are not going to ever agree. It is a shame that people who do not want to compromise set their agenda back decades.

What is more important, seeing your man in a hospital and receiving a check or what you call your relationship?

 

[McBell]

And gay marriage will have a long hard road ahead of it. I see more legislation defining marriage. The more this issue is pushed, the more laws will be enacted.

I can see we are having a circular conversation and we are not going to ever agree. It is a shame that people who do not want to compromise set their agenda back decades.

What is more important, seeing your man in a hospital and receiving a check or what you call your relationship?

You have based your argument on faulty premises.
You are talking as though the only difference is what it is called.
You are talking as if 'seperate but equal' has actually worked at some time in the past.

The facts are that they are not equal, there are huge differences between the two, and the whole 'seperate but equal' has NEVER worked in the past.

 

[Jaymes]

Wait a few years. You won't be able to even voice your views without risking censure, and it might even cost you a job. I can point out to you a few signs that we're heading in that direction if you wish.

I hope to goodness that never happens.

 

[Mathematician]

I'm curious if those who oppose homosexual marriage would think their opinion is any different than a person who believes, due to religious faith, that interracial marriage is wrong.

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm curious if those who oppose homosexual marriage would think their opinion is any different than a person who believes, due to religious faith, that interracial marriage is wrong.

Do you have any scripture to quote? Please show me where this is in the bible.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Wow... how did I miss THIS one?

Hate is merely the absense of love. Hate and murder come from our dislikes and fear. In other words, if you aren't actively loving them, then you are indeed HATING them. This is true for all goups.

So the subject has turned to gay marriages. Does the refusal to marry a gay couple indicate hate or intolerance? It could, but that is not neccesarily the case. However, politicing to BAN gay marriages would probably be an indicator of hostility and intolerance towards those who believed differently than you. Hurling insults is an obvious indicator of hatred as is any violence.

Unfortunately, we have a tendency to villify those who disagree with us or who refuse to see things our way. The Catholic Church would not perform my wedding as I am not a member. I don't contend that the Catholic Church hates me, but I won't be donating any money to them either! Now, I have been labled from time to time by members of the Catholic Church. More often than not, this is hurtful to me. Labels, whether they are well intended or not, have a tendency to alienate and to polarize any discussion. If someone refuses to do what WE want or think is fair, we often label them and more often than not, that label is erroneous.

 

[FatMan]

Do you have any scripture to quote? Please show me where this is in the bible.

Given most people's penchant for doing so, find me any piece of Scripture and I can probably spin it in such a way to both show disdain for and support for anything I want it to.

Quoting scripture is probably one of the more useless tools of debate.

 

[McBell]

I guess Reverend Rick has me on Ignore.
BUt I have no idea why he would.

 

[Nanda]

Hate is merely the absense of love.

Hate isn't the absence of love. The absence of love is ambivalence. The world is comprised almost entirely out of people I don't love, but I don't hate anybody. I don't think all Christians hate gay people - in fact, I know they don't. The religious right, however, as a group, does seem pretty hostile.

 

[Mike182]

Many Christians are sympathetic to the current situation, but are offended with same sex couples calling their union a marriage.

Most people want gays and lesbians to have the same exact rights. They just want exclusive rights to the term "marriage".

i can see where you are coming from here, i personally would be happy to settle for civil unions IF civil unions had exactly the same legal rights and benefits that marriage doesn, but it doesn't. plus, others within the gay community would take a "equal but different isn't equal" stance, and it is a justified stance.

I can understand your principle of this argument, but you fail to show any compassion for the other side. Holding on to your principles most likely will backfire and encourage the other side to define marriage as being one man and one women.

It is sad that this issue cannot be settled with a compromise. The more aggressive the same sex agenda becomes, the more the other side will pass laws.

Is this homophobic? Perhaps it is. Is it hate? Not at the present time, but it could be manifested when all this pushing and shoving occurs. At best it will be counter productive for all concerned.

if there was not a massive history of gay oppression and discrimination that still exists in many forms today, then i would agree with you - but the fact that gays have been trampled over by the religious institutions makes it darn difficult for the gay community to back off. are we coming on too strong? sorry, but we are no where near as strong on the religious right as they have been on us in the past, and still are today!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Giving in and compromising would be an olive branch that would solve everything. When no one wants to compromise, being the bigger person speaks volumes about a persons character. Actually the Gay and Lesbian community would then hold the higher ground taking credit for appeasing the homophobic members of the religious right.

to paraphrase Jaymes quoted Maesi, why should we beg for scraps from the table when we deserve our equal chair and plate?

 

[Nanda]

to paraphrase Jaymes quoted Maesi, why should we beg for scraps from the table when we deserve our equal chair and plate?

FRUBALS! (For all concerned)

 

[MaddLlama]

Do you have any scripture to quote? Please show me where this is in the bible.

Do all laws in the Bible apply to everyone on earth?

 

[lilithu]

Do all laws in the Bible apply to everyone on earth?

In fairness to Rev. Rick, Gene's question was implicitly refering to people who would follow scripture. So Rick's question was not necessarily suggesting that everyone need follow biblical authority. He was suggesting (I think) that for those who follow scripture there is no scriptural basis to be against inter-racial marriage, whereas there may be scriptural basis to be against same-sex marriage.