Protesting against Freedom - Rally against Gay marriage.............

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I'm sorry, expressions of amused irritation must be routed through our amused irritation department. Please press 5 if you'd like to hear your balance and date of next payment. Press 6 to go and @#$%@# yourself. And thank you for dialing the Early Retirement Forum!

 

[setab]

Oh Horsepuckey.    The poor, oppressed, white, middle-class, christian majority.    I weap for them.  

/quote]

This statement once offends me. Twice is more than two times as bad. So why don't people with different view points speak up here? Gee, I wonder.

setab

 

[mb]

Yeh,

Any conservatives around here that think granting civil rights to all races in the United States was a bad idea?

Minnesotans shouldn't have the vote.  And Californians either.  To many d _ _ _ liberals.  Opps, forgot I'm a California liberal.

Funny, before GWB came along I considered myself to be some where in the middle, voted for selected republicans, liberal on many issues more conservative on others but I've had to adapt to the changing times.

MB

 

[LRS]

Whoa, I just got in and read this whole thread. As a middle-aged soccer mom from a small conservative town surrounded by God loving decent white people, I just want to say how much I really appreciate diversity. What a dull damn place this world would be if everyone looked and acted just like me and my neighbors. The biggest thing we get up to is the annual 4th of July block barbeque. Yawn.

I have friends who are bi, gay, lesbian and tranny, and I couldn't imagine the world without them. Let 'em get married! These dudes/dudettes know how to party!!

 

[sgeeeee]

This statement once offends me.  Twice is more than two times as bad.  So why don't people with different view points speak up here?  Gee, I wonder.  

setab

I give up . . . why?  Could it be that the intolerant moral majority would rather whine about being persecuted than have to discuss their intolerant position?  They are willing to march in public to force their narrow view on the rest of the world.  But if someone points out that their position is not rational, they act hurt and complain about a lack of tolerance.  What hypocricy.   They try to force their beliefs on everyone and cry "intolerance".

You say you are offended. . . I am offended by these groups every time they choose to force their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

Speak up if you really have something to say.  But don't expect sympathy by claiming that the religious right is being persecuted.  

 

[ladelfina]

I was offended by Ashcroft's obligatory staff prayer breakfasts. I'm offended by the American Taliban and their "pro-life" stance that embraces war, torture and the death penalty.

I'm offended that the Pat Robertsons and James Dobsons get a constant hearing, and that they are portrayed as "Christians", while the media goes bonkers over the anti-war rhetoric of Rev. Lowery at Coretta King's funeral. The Bushian "Christians" couldn't care less about Christ's message.

You may remember some of these top ten hits:

"Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone."

"Judge not, that you be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye"

"But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you."

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

Indeed.

 

[ladelfina]

Arrgh.. and I just came across this:

“Bob” is a geologist and a teacher at a science education institution that serves several Arkansas public school districts. ... Teachers at his facility are forbidden to use the “e-word” (evolution) with the kids
...
“I am instructed NOT to use hard numbers when telling kids how old rocks are. I am supposed to say that these rocks are VERY VERY OLD ... but I am NOT to say that these rocks are thought to be about 300 million years old.”
...
The explanation that had been given to Bob by his supervisors was that their science facility is in a delicate position and must avoid irritating some religious fundamentalists who may have their fingers on the purse strings of various school districts.

Arkansas Times, 3/23/2006


Then we're going to "wonder" why America is losing its edge in research and techonology.

 

[justin]

I am offended by these groups every time they choose to force their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

I was offended by Ashcroft's obligatory staff prayer breakfasts. I'm offended by the American Taliban and their "pro-life" stance that embraces war, torture and the death penalty.

I'm offended that the Pat Robertsons and James Dobsons get a constant hearing, and that they are portrayed as "Christians", while the media goes bonkers over the anti-war rhetoric of Rev. Lowery at Coretta King's funeral. The Bushian "Christians" couldn't care less about Christ's message.

Oh no!! The poor, oppressed, white, middle-class, liberal majority is unhappy. I weep for them.

Playing devil's advocate here (or god's advocate, depending on which side of the issue you are on : ):

How can one support gay marriage without ultimately relying on their own values and belief system? Where do notions of "justice", "fairness", and "equity" come from, if not from one's own values and beliefs?

In this thread, I have seen a number of heated rebuttals to the "religious right's" position against gay marriages. I have yet to see a valid, cohesive argument in favor of gay marriage that doesn't rely on values and beliefs.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

I guess there cant be ANY argument on ANYTHING without a value or belief coming into play. Hmmm?

I think the bottom line is that its not anyone elses business what other people do, as long as it isnt directly and measurably affecting them. But thats just a belief based on my values.

As a non-practicing christian of the catholic persuasion (complete with crappy private school for a couple of years!), I cringe when I see the bible thumping...if for no other reason than the fact that a whole bunch of american citizens arent christians. The absolute ignorance of the separation of church and state. Its there for a reason...

 

[Rich_by_the_Bay]

As a non-practicing christian of the catholic persuasion (complete with crappy private school for a couple of years!), I cringe when I see the bible thumping...if for no other reason than the fact that a whole bunch of american citizens arent christians. The absolute ignorance of the separation of church and state. Its there for a reason...

Geez, CFB. You're a lot smarter than everyone says .

I believe that tolerance is neither a conservative or liberal value in the American context. No one owns it.

 

[bpp]

In this thread, I have seen a number of heated rebuttals to the "religious right's" position against gay marriages. I have yet to see a valid, cohesive argument in favor of gay marriage that doesn't rely on values and beliefs.

All right, how about framing it as a negotiation: you don't f#$% with what I want to do, and I won't f#$% with what you want to do. As long as we don't hurt each other -- and the psychic pain of tolerating each other's existence doesn't count as "hurting." Deal?

Generalize the above to a social contract between every member of society and every other.

Another, though similar, formulation: Simple manners. Which, Quentin Crisp once argued, are the true basis for morality anyway.

Bpp

 

[justin]

I guess there cant be ANY argument on ANYTHING without a value or belief coming into play. Hmmm?

I agree. That's why I think the argument "The religious right is wrong because support for their position is derived from their values and beliefs" is a fallacious argument.

I think the bottom line is that its not anyone elses business what other people do, as long as it isnt directly and measurably affecting them. But thats just a belief based on my values.

The point that seems to be overlooked in this thread is that the religious right IS "directly and measurably affected" by the concept of gay marriage. Not in a physical sense, but rather in a spiritual or moral sense. For someone who's core identity is largely based on their faith, gay marriage might be one of the most important issues to them. Imagine someone who is so vehemently opposed to gay marriage that they are filled with animosity at the thought or sight of a gay married couple. Ignoring for the moment the appropriateness of their feelings, it doesn't take much empathy to put yourself in this person's shoes and to understand that their feelings truly are hurt by the notion of gay marriage.

At this point, everyone is probably thinking "yeah, ignoring how much of a homophobic bigot they are, I see their point". This rebuttal challenges the validity of their core belief that homosexuality is immoral. But who gave those accepting of homosexuality the moral high ground in this debate? Who is to be the arbiter of whether "homosexuality is ok" or "homosexuality is bad"? Those who think "homosexuality is ok"?

Think about how strongly you (everyone, not just you CFB) feel that we should be tolerant of gay marriages and accepting of the homosexual lifestyle. Now imagine someone with equally strong convictions but a diametrically opposed viewpoint.

 

[unclemick]

Hmmmm

The curmudgeon in me - says this a secret nafarious plot by lawyers to create a new growth industry.

Domestic partners - social security rules, tax brackets, pension rights, inheritance rules, divorce, alimony, yada, yada, yada.

Mind boggling!

heh heh heh - first cup o coffee.

 

[justin]

All right, how about framing it as a negotiation: you don't f#$% with what I want to do, and I won't f#$% with what you want to do. As long as we don't hurt each other -- and the psychic pain of tolerating each other's existence doesn't count as "hurting." Deal?

I would accept your bargain, except I am in favor of certain f***ing withs.

A certain minimal level of taxation and certain rules governing conduct in a civilized society would be required. Enforcement of taxation and rules would also have to exist. The problem lies therein: someone will consider this "f***ing with" them.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Geez, CFB. You're a lot smarter than everyone says .

I wouldnt count on that.

Let me help with this.

There are two kinds of people in the world.

#1: People who want to do their own thing as long as it doesnt materially effect other people. They do not appreciate or understand people who want to tell them what they can and cannot do.

#2: People who feel they know what is right and what is wrong, and expect everyone to conform to their conceptions of this. Sometimes they use the excuse of a religion, a book, or a movement...maybe just a majority. Usually they are very persistent on wanting to press this conception onto everyone and have it be accepted by them. They do not understand why everyone doesnt see that their perception of right and wrong is so obviously correct.

If you think about it for a minute, you might find that almost everyone you know falls into one of the two above categories. And the people you know that are #2's (and maybe its YOU!) arent happy with the way I presented it.

I'm a #1, and in matters where I disagree with the law, I follow it. I vehemently resist #2's that want to make laws that create incursions into my private life that have no material effect on others. I dont need to be nannied, and I dont need to be forced to agree with someone elses ideas of how I should act.

In other words, marrying a gay horse while drinking goats blood and rubbing beaver cheese on your belly, done in private, does not materially effect me. So I do not care.

It must be really fun to be a muslim or a wiccan or (whatever) and be led into a courtroom that has the ten commandments posted outside. Big fun.

It must be bigger fun to be in love with someone and want to cement that relationship in faith and in the eyes of the law and be unable to do that because someone else doesnt like the idea of it.

The really funny part is, conservatives used to be all about exactly this. Keep government small, out of peoples everyday lives, build roads and schools, defend the country, support the law and protect the constitution, keep our frickin noses out of where it doesnt absolutely need to be, pinch pennies, reduce taxes and support big business, no unnecessary handouts to those unwilling to work, everyone get in the boat and start paddling.

Now its gun nuts, anti-abortion nuts, anti drug nuts and anti-gay nuts invading other sovereign nations, spending like drunken sailors, devastating our civil rights, blowing past the constitution, and slapping silly the very foundation of this country: people seeking to escape religious prosecution.

Dude...where's my political party?

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Think about how strongly you (everyone, not just you CFB) feel that we should be tolerant of gay marriages and accepting of the homosexual lifestyle. Now imagine someone with equally strong convictions but a diametrically opposed viewpoint.

Believe me, I can see it. Two guys sucking face sort of grosses me out. Two girls on the other hand...eh...not so much.

But nothing around allowing gay marriage forces me to accept anything. There are tons of permissable things that I dont much care for. I just dont get around to expecting others to conform to what I think is ok.

I mean, if this results in my being forced to go out and marry another guy, then i'm all against it. If it means that I have to watch two same sex people "go at it" in public, well the same basic decency laws that work for heterosexual couples should apply there. Which is usually someone yelling "Get a room!".

Other than that, my marriage to my wife is not effected one whit by anyone elses relationship or marriage.

 

[youbet]

Geez, CFB. You're a lot smarter than everyone says .

I believe that tolerance is neither a conservative or liberal value in the American context. No one owns it.

Rich_in_Tampa:

I hesitate to jump into discussions that have turned argumentative but your comment regarding tolerance is so well put please allow me to jump in and say "me too."

The one-sided points of view expressed by religious fundamentalists (of all religions) are obvious and unfortunate.  But so-called progressives often fail to see their own shortcomings when they artifically categorize people and criticize them with a broad brush.

One of my grandchildren is developmentally delayed due to issues at birth.  His parents have received help from a religiously affiliated organization which sponsors training, workshops, etc., even though they are not members.  This group has been helpful beyond all expectations with never a hint of evangelism or recruiting.

Recently, I was startled to hear friends (who outspokenly identify themselves as liberal progressives) blast ALL Christain based religious organizations as evil, as needing to have their tax exempt status removed and on and on.  They painted these organizations all the same color and attacked them all with the same venom.  Since then, I've listened to so-called progressives in a new light.  So many are "their way or no way" and intolerant of anyone they see as being out of step with their views.

Every situation deserves its own analysis.  Every group is unique.  Every person is her/himself.  Tolerance is neither a conservative or liberal value.      

 

[justin]

Dude...where's my political party?

Not sure. If you find it, let me know. I'll probably join it. The problem I have with living in a civilized society is the other people in it.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Those BASTARDS!

 

[Andre1969]

Imagine someone who is so vehemently opposed to gay marriage that they are filled with animosity at the thought or sight of a gay married couple. Ignoring for the moment the appropriateness of their feelings, it doesn't take much empathy to put yourself in this person's shoes and to understand that their feelings truly are hurt by the notion of gay marriage.

I'm sure there are people that are vehemently opposed to interracial marriaged and filled with animosity at the thought or sight of an interracial couple. And those people, I hate to say it, have that right. You have the right to hate whomever and whatever you want. HOWEVER, when that hatred causes a person to take actions that hinder, hurt, humiliate, or discriminate against another person or group of people, THAT's where the problem starts.

If someone can't stand the sight of a gay couple, interracial couple, etc, that's not the gay/etc person's problem. It's the problem of the person who is feeling the hate. That person needs to control that hate and ignorance. And that includes their hate and ignorance disguised as morals. People need to start looking at their own problems and worrying about themselves, and not the others around them. Instead of carrying on about gay people diminishing family values, instead lets focus eradicating spousal abuse, child abuse, teen pregnancies, addictions, etc. Often the first ones to start crying about "family values" have a warped sense of their own values and are just looking for a scapegoat to blame.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

DING DING DING!

 

[laurence]

Believe me, I can see it.  Two guys sucking face sort of grosses me out.  Two girls on the other hand...eh...not so much.

But nothing around allowing gay marriage forces me to accept anything.  There are tons of permissable things that I dont much care for.  I just dont get around to expecting others to conform to what I think is ok.

I mean, if this results in my being forced to go out and marry another guy, then i'm all against it.  If it means that I have to watch two same sex people "go at it" in public, well the same basic decency laws that work for heterosexual couples should apply there.  Which is usually someone yelling "Get a room!".

Other than that, my marriage to my wife is not effected one whit by anyone elses relationship or marriage.

This touches on a good point, a lot of what people cite when they get upset over the "homosexual lifestyle" are really universal violations of common decency, hetero or homo.  I don't want public sex acts by heteros or homosexuals to be tolerated.  But I would feel very fortunate to have a nice yuppie couple who keeps their yard nice next door, whether it's Adam and Eve or Steve.

I believe a lot of what gets associated with the gay culture (and gets reinforced by many in the gay culture) is a reaction to a majority that wanted them to be invisible for so long.  So now having parades with floats of a bunch of men wearing drag complete with high heels and leather thongs and getting "in your face" is  a way of saying, "we are not ashamed, and we're here to stay!".  The anti-gay forces are only strengthening and helping create more of the aspects they hate the most.

youbet, I wholeheartedly agree.  I am a Christian who is very tolerant (I think) which includes biting my toungue around my agnostic/atheist friends and family when they go off on a Christian-bashing sessions.  One in particular went on for over an hour in my Dad's living room, with both me and DW there.  They all knew we went to church, it never occured to them we might take offense.  If we ever mention it, we would just get blank stares and then a "Oh, well you know we aren't talking about you!" which comes across a little like telling a black person, "oh, we ain't talkin' about you, LeRoy, you been a good quient servant the whole time, it's those uppity ____ who is tryin' to stir things up at city hall I'm talking about!" - again, it's probably just an emotional reaction to feeling like they don't fit in with the majority culture, and they have a safe environment to vent, hit back(?)

 

[bruce1]

My Two cents partly on topic

In my opinion the Christian fundamentalists (Bible Thumpers) are a great threat to the Western Society they claim to support. Should you dare to disagree with them you are branded a heretic and non Christian. Where does this leave the non Christian? The popular Christian movement is simply a tool ofbig business and big government.

I don't see any harm in gay marriage but wish it could be called something else that would give them the legal rights of marriage. I see the word marriage as a union between opposite sexes. I also see abortion as murder since I beleive that a fetus is human no matter what stage it is in. One has little to do with the other.

BTW I have not been inside a Church since my aunts funeral ten years ago but was raised Lutheren/United and I my consience would not let me do some of the things some church going people do.

Live and let live

PET said the State has no place in the nations bedrooms. (Pierre Elliott Trudeau)

BTW I separate true Christians who are basically good from Fundamentalist Bible Thumpers who think their way is the only way.

Bruce

 

[setab]

I give up . . . why?  Could it be that the intolerant moral majority would rather whine about being persecuted than have to discuss their intolerant position?  They are willing to march in public to force their narrow view on the rest of the world.  But if someone points out that their position is not rational, they act hurt and complain about a lack of tolerance.  What hypocricy.   They try to force their beliefs on everyone and cry "intolerance".

You say your are offended. . . I am offended by these groups every time they choose to force their religious beliefs on the rest of us.

Speak up if you really have something to say.  But don't expect sympathy by claiming that the religious right is being persecuted.  

The tone is hateful and much more intolerant than the intolerance it purports to object to. The post is frought with over generalizations, logical inconsistencies and the type of rhetoric than incites rather than solves. Why would anyone want to sit down and discuss anything with someone who rants on like this? I am middle class, white and Christian and I don't feel ashamed about any of that.

setab

 

[setab]

I was offended by Ashcroft's obligatory staff prayer breakfasts. I'm offended by the American Taliban and their "pro-life" stance that embraces war, torture and the death penalty.

I'm offended that the Pat Robertsons and James Dobsons get a constant hearing, and that they are portrayed as "Christians", while the media goes bonkers over the anti-war rhetoric of Rev. Lowery at Coretta King's funeral. The Bushian "Christians" couldn't care less about Christ's message.

You may remember some of these top ten hits:

"Let he among you who is without sin, cast the first stone."

"Judge not, that you be judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you. And why do you look at the speck in your brother's eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Let me remove the speck from your eye'; and look, a plank is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye"

"But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you."

"You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.' But I say to you, Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also; and if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well; and if any one forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to him who begs from you, and do not refuse him who would borrow from you. You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust."

"Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do."

Indeed.

I guess I probably don't agree with much of this except for the quote from scripture, but at least I feel the tone and approach of your comments leaves room for discussion. I wish, however, that you could make your points without making them personal to Bush, Ashcroft etc. It's the personal attacks on individuals that I think are most damaging.

setab