Discussion: Gay Rights XV

[Marx]

I have two friends who have been together for decades here in Houston, they are both successful lawyers, well respected, some of the coolest guys you will ever meet. They have "shown" me more about the "people" they are, rather than just a descriptive word that is used to describe them. I love these guys like family, I hope for the day that they will be able to marry here in Texas and LIVE here. They love Texas, they love Houston, and they want to stay here. I will/have admitted here that I truly do not understand people who are gay, it is very foreign to me, but not in a negative way....I just don't understand it, BUT, I do understand and see the love that these two guys have for each other, and I don't see anything wrong with it...therefore I support gay marriage and the fact that they deserve the same rights I have, even though they make about 10x what I make... : / haha...

The two arguments boil down to this:

Religious reasons - which is not a valid argument against making it legal since, if for no other reason, it violates the ability of churches that want to perform same-sex marriage by preventing them from doing so.


It's icky - which is obviously not a valid argument against making it legal.


And I'm willing to bet that, more often than not, the first argument is used to cover up the fact that the second argument is the real reason someone is against it.

Exactly, Wieg.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Coming from a Christian background, and not necessarily being square with all of it....many of your questions can be answered simply by looking at how many who follow certain religions as in denominations are taught.

Very little is actually preached from most pulpits about homosexuality except in very deluded yet general terms.

Many pastors see homosexuality as an obsession and many are born with that gene to be obsessive as in over eating, drinking, drugs, etc....no one chooses to be an over eater, an alcoholic, or an abuser of drugs, sex, etc...

So, to see some writing it here, and hearing it other places, I'm not surprised at all that many believe that being gay is not a sin, as in having that obsessive gene, BUT engaging in the sexual act of homosexuality is where the sin comes in.

That is the basic belief of many Christians, so they totally justify their beliefs and opinions are are being truthful when they say they can love the person, but hate the sin.

The thing that people I think need to understand is that just because something becomes law, it is not going to change a good percentage of people's minds who believe as I just stated above, no matter how many times we call them stupid, ignorant, backwards or otherwise....any more than sending a gay teenager to some camp somewhere is going to make him/her straight... If they believe the Bible to be the complete and total "Word of God" as in straight from him....then changing their mind is going to be impossible.

I think its more important to not generalize the term " Christian " from both sides. There's plenty of "Christians" as well as their denominations that actually don't believe homosexuality is a sin and arnt preached to as such... And that list is growing

Not all Christians are accepting and welcoming. And not all Christians view it as sin or immoral.

Both sides need to be very aware of that. Christianity typically can't agree on most of the bible... Which is why it's quite possibly the religion with the most sects and divinations, off-shoots from its root of origin. And nearly every single one claims there beliefs and practices are truth.

 

[Anita18]

Haven't seen this linked here. Such an incredibly powerful article about the gay soldier in Iraq (the one with the huge biceps) who showed his face to ask a question about DADT during the Google/YouTube Republican debate in 2011.

At the airport, they watched soldiers embracing their families, saying goodbye. Hill and Snyder were hunkered under an escalator. "Like little rats, hiding," Hill would say.

....

Many mornings, Hill awakens to voice-mail messages from Snyder. He is careful to listen to them on a headset.

"I love you. I miss you. You're one day closer to getting home. You're my hero."

He is home on leave in May 2011 when they decide to get married. Ohio will not perform the ceremony, so they drive to Washington, D.C. He returns to war wearing a titanium wedding band.

Jessica, he says. For his screensaver, he uses the image of a lesbian friend.

http://lat.ms/1ceXCv0

The anti-gay folks want to make the gay marriage issue all about sex, but it's not just about sex. It's about marriage. It's about who you want to share the rest of your life with. Why should we deny happiness to consenting adults like this?

 

[wiegeabo]

I liked how in the second or third episode of The Newsroom this past season Jeff Daniels' character pretty effectively tore that incident at the debate apart and shamed everyone who booed.

I really need to watch the rest of the season.

 

[floreairfoot]

Haven't seen this linked here. Such an incredibly powerful article about the gay soldier in Iraq (the one with the huge biceps) who showed his face to ask a question about DADT during the Google/YouTube Republican debate in 2011.

http://lat.ms/1ceXCv0

The anti-gay folks want to make the gay marriage issue all about sex, but it's not just about sex. It's about marriage. It's about who you want to share the rest of your life with. Why should we deny happiness to consenting adults like this?

"When Stephen left for Iraq in 2010, the couple had to hide under an airport escalator to say goodbye, while other soldiers were able to embrace their loved ones publicly."

Just reading that infuriates me..

Having to hide your love for another person, just to keep the cruel and bigoted "comfortable"; it turns my stomach.

 

[Pink Ranger]

"When Stephen left for Iraq in 2010, the couple had to hide under an airport escalator to say goodbye, while other soldiers were able to embrace their loved ones publicly."

Just reading that infuriates me..

Having to hide your love for another person, just to keep the cruel and bigoted "comfortable"; it turns my stomach.

But to do otherwise, would be "flaunting their agenda," aka "forcing us to accept something" or "throwing it in our faces" right? If us in the LGBT community want social conservatives to accept us, it's back under the stairs like Harry Potter.

 

[floreairfoot]

If a man and a woman can kiss each other in public, then so can two men or two women, there's no difference; love is love.

For those who have an issue with it.. try not being so selfish.

 

[Kelly]

But to do otherwise, would be "flaunting their agenda," aka "forcing us to accept something" or "throwing it in our faces" right? If us in the LGBT community want social conservatives to accept us, it's back under the stairs like Harry Potter.

Here is the problem with this statement...


It isn't going to happen, no matter where you kiss. If in order to win the war, it means social conservatives accepting homosexuality as right? the war will never be won.

If the war is gaining true equal rights, and specifically in the area of marriage, then the war can be won.

 

[Thundercrack85]

Maybe try winning over a conservative, rather than all conservatives. Set realistic goals.

 

[Anita18]

I do find that many social conservatives change their tune when someone they know and care about is gay. Then it's not so easy to label them as "the other."

I actually didn't know all that many gay folks when I was growing up, but I've always accepted it because I was taught that love is love, no matter what it looks like. If anything, I think that a deeply committed gay couple (wearing wedding rings, etc) holding hands in public should help turn the social conservatives, because aren't they all about marriage and committed relationships and stuff? They all seem to think that gay men just sleep with everything that moves, but seeing a deeply committed couple should change their minds.

Of course, that still assumes that isn't about the ick factor, which I think is still a huge issue for most people who are against it. -shrug-

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Here is the problem with this statement...


It isn't going to happen, no matter where you kiss. If in order to win the war, it means social conservatives accepting homosexuality as right? the war will never be won.

If the war is gaining true equal rights, and specifically in the area of marriage, then the war can be won.

Maybe try winning over a conservative, rather than all conservatives. Set realistic goals.

i believe more in "eventually" opening the minds to "most" conservatives. Certainly not "ALL" because that's just not going to happen.

Racism is still very much alive today, but racial crimes and segregation, and those who make racial remarks or "hate" other races in the US are much much lower, and i'd still wager make up a very minor amount of US citizen's. Sure, racism be it intentional or unintentional still exists, but they are protected under law, and moment's of racism are ridiculed, and not usually tolerated. That's the goal for me for gay rights. You can make anti-gay statements, throw your religion up as a shield or excuse for it, and all is deemed "ok" by many... The Conservative Christian Right can essentially do what they want or support who they want, and they usually win... Dan Cathy and Phil Robertson were great examples of this... all other situations be it a anti-christian muslim remark, anti-black remarks, anti-jewish remarks etc... are never tolerated.. but when the Christian right makes really horrible anti-gay remarks.. it's deemed acceptable. And that's not right. I want the same treatment all around. It should not be socially except-able for people to support anti-gay feelings or remarks even if religion is used as an excuse for it. Maturity and Intelligence should be present in the understanding that ones beliefs, are ones beliefs, and if you can't say something nice... it's probably best you not say anything at all when it's in a situation like this... and government and social law should not be doc-turned by one's personal beliefs on religion, because not everyone is christian, and many Christians also don't agree on the same things.

 

[SV Fan]

If a man and a woman can kiss each other in public, then so can two men or two women, there's no difference; love is love.

For those who have an issue with it.. try not being so selfish.

Can't we be against people kissing in public in general straight or gay?

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

Here is the problem with this statement...


It isn't going to happen, no matter where you kiss. If in order to win the war, it means social conservatives accepting homosexuality as right? the war will never be won.

If the war is gaining true equal rights, and specifically in the area of marriage, then the war can be won.

Yeah I agree. I'm not saying the two are 100% compatible but there are still a lot of people against interracial relationships. There are always going to be people against something.

Can't we be against people kissing in public in general straight or gay?

Hahaha. Yeah I'm not a fan of a lot of PDA of the kissing variety.

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Can't we be against people kissing in public in general straight or gay?

I'd like to be able to hold hands with Marx in public and not feel like people are judging me, I'd like to kiss Marx in public when hugging and saying goodbye as we leave off in different directions, I'd like to be able to have a romantic moment with a kiss in public should the moment allow.

"Making out" in public, is a whole other story... but there's nothing wrong with a quick peck

 

[spideyboy_1111]

Yeah I agree. I'm not saying the two are 100% compatible but there are still a lot of people against interracial relationships. There are always going to be people against something.

key word "alot", I really do not think "Most" in this day and age are against interracial marriage.

 

[SV Fan]

Here is the problem with this statement...

It isn't going to happen, no matter where you kiss. If in order to win the war, it means social conservatives accepting homosexuality as right? the war will never be won.

If the war is gaining true equal rights, and specifically in the area of marriage, then the war can be won.

Personally I think the way to go after Social Conservatives is call them out for their "less Big Government" BS. You can also call them out on the hypocrisy of fear of Sharia Law

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

key word "alot", I really do not think "Most" in this day and age are against interracial marriage.

Point taken.

 

[Kelly]

Personally I think the way to go after Social Conservatives is call them out for their "less Big Government" BS. You can also call them out on the hypocrisy of fear of Sharia Law

And that does what? Makes them "feel" bad?

 

[spideyboy_1111]

logic doesn't work well on the illogical

 

[SV Fan]

And that does what? Makes them "feel" bad?

They are a lost cause, you might not win them over but you can win others who are a bit more open minded to show them the stupidity of their arguments.

 

[Kelly]

I have found that calling people stupid, ignorant, and whatever other word comes to mind doesn't usually do much to change their minds.

I tend to move more towards modeling what I think is the right way to go works much better...and berating people, IMO, is not being a model that will change anything.

 

[SV Fan]

I have found that calling people stupid, ignorant, and whatever other word comes to mind doesn't usually do much to change their minds.

Well I wouldn't outright call them stupid, I would just point out they have 2 conflicting views that don't mesh with each other and let other decide if that is stupid or not. The people who hate gay marriage will continue hating gay marriage and the people who truly want less government in peoples lives might think twice about their views on gay marriage

 

[spideyboy_1111]

I have found that calling people stupid, ignorant, and whatever other word comes to mind doesn't usually do much to change their minds.

I tend to move more towards modeling what I think is the right way to go works much better...and berating people, IMO, is not being a model that will change anything.

i think SV was trying to say, you can show how someone is stupid using logic, and it might not change their minds, but it can certainly wake up people who are reading or viewing it

 

[Thundercrack85]

I wonder about that.

Still I think homophobia is primarily motivated by an "ick factor", not really anything particularly philosophical / religious.

That makes it somewhat distinct from racism.

 

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]460467[/split]