b.k. barunt wrote:sailorseal wrote:I would like to add for the viewing of all anti-gay marriage readers:
Gays are not looking to enter your church and change your ideas, they want as little to do with you as you do with them. They are looking to be able to sit by their partner on his/her death bed, to be protected by the law, to be given basic rights that straight people seem to inherit because they can procreate.
Absolute bullshit, but considering the source will certainly shorten my rant. There is a great deal of time and energy spent on the part of the gayboys to change our ideas. They most definitely want to enter our churches and any other venue where they have been previously denied access. The whole gay marriage thing is not about tax breaks or "sitting by their partner on their deathbed" (please, the histrionics, please), but it is a major attempt to legitimize the homosexual lifestyle.
They do not "want as little to do with you as you do with them" - do you even think about what you're saying before you just blat it out? If i, as a musician, refuse to do a gay wedding, i can be sued just like the photographers who were fined a few thousand for doing the same. They want to be accepted as a "normal" part of everyday life, and anyone who will not accept them in this way will be targeted as a "homophobic" racist.
Honibaz
You are combining a few different things there.
Do homosexuals want their lifestyle accepted? Absolutely! Do those of various beliefs want their churches to accept them
and their lifestyles? Yes! Are there people who want to use any little slight as an excuse to sue, to call "discrimination"? Abosolutely!
Everybody wants to be accepted. I have, in my lifetime seen a change in how homosexuals have been viewed. My grandmother remembered a day when homosexuals were jailed or put in insane asylums. I remember just plain basic idiocy and stupid cruelty. But, you know what? The old timers in this town can point to places where Italiens were simply "not welcome". My late father-in-law used to say that if you went outside your select neighborhood, you would get "beat up". Employment discrimination? There are good reasons why you can find fraternal organizations for just about any ethnic group you can name. Today, while racism and prejudice of all kinds certainly still happens, it is largely removed from our daily lives. More and more that is true for ALL ethnic groups, including Black Americans. We are moving in that direction for homosexuals. Some find that terrifying, but most simply find it normal or even "refreshing". Hatred, disdain, etc, hurts the hater far more than the person being hated, after all.
The church issue is a very difficult one. But, it is a FAITH issue. Churches are not static entities. People, societies change and churches along with them. Some churches already feel that homosexuals should be accepted. Others do not. There are already divisions. No doubt, there will be more. Eventually, this might wind up being another division, akin to the Reformation or perhaps the more recent anabaptist "revolution". Hopefully, we will rest on the basic faith in Christ and not let individual disagreements take us from that, but it is a decision to be fought and debated within the churches. Certainly society as a whole does impact churches, but ultimately, it is not about what happens in society. It is about how the churches deal with what happens "out there".
As for the last, the claim of "discrimination", this is an issue, true. However, the problem there is not homosexuality. The problem is that there are some people out there who are eager to consider every slight, even what most would call imagined slights, "discrimination". Unfortunately, our courts right now are giving them a bit too much voice. I know you are referring to a specific court case (In Chicago, I believe?) about which there already is a thread. Any specific case is too complicated to make a real opinion by nay who did not read the whole transcript, etc. very valid. However, what I will say is that if protection of your beliefs and rights is your concern, then THAT is the direction to take.. to say "hey, I have the right..", NOT to deny other people a basic human right because it is something that makes you uncomfortable, even that you think outright "evil",
providing it is not something that truly causes you harm. If you are worried that you might, as a musician, be forced to attend to homosexual marriages, then that might be a reason for a law clarifying whether and under what circumstances musicians are private and when public. If you are playing on a street corner, then I doubt anyone would say but that you need to play for all there. In a private venue... it is an issue that needs clarification or perhaps legislation.
As for your first assertion, that this is not about inheritances and medical decisions.. you are just plain wrong. Those ARE the issues about which most "normal-living", "regular" homosexuals get livid, get terrified. Could those issues be dealt with outside of the institution of marriage? Perhaps, but society already has pretty clear definitions of all of that in regards to marriage. If we create a new class, then a whole new set of legislation is required. Also, it just creates too many situations where people just won't know what does and does not apply. Frankly, I think there are too many individual state definitions of marriage anyway. The whole "joint property" isse is a big conundrum. However, that is another topic.
