"Is Gay Marriage the Wrong Issue?"

Let me preface this with the fact that while I am not gay, I am not against gay marriage. I have been reading the posts here at DU on gay marriage and Rick Warren and I haven't really figured out how I felt about his being chosen to give the invocation at the inauguration. That is, until now. I just read a post at Huffington Post by Bob Ostertag that really made sense to me. Please check it out and really give it some thought. I think it can help a lot of people get over their angst.

Here is the link:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bob-ostertag/why-gay-marriage-is-the-w_b_152717.html

Grammatically, it doesn't work.

thanks!

Thank you for your concern. :eyes:

to get over it. that was a poor choice of words. i should have said "I think it can help a lot of people feel a little less ambivalent about Barack Obama."

When it comes to fighting for equal rights, I respect the folks who hang onto their anger more than those who are ambivalent about their rights. Maybe we don't want your help if that's what it amounts to.

But hey, that's swell that you "aren't against" gay people having the same rights as you.

If the gay people I know in real life acted like the bunch of you, I wouldn't associate with them.
They happen to be some of my favorite people though. Not all of them are JUST ANGRY.

ANGER did not win blacks or women civil rights. It isn't about that. Time to regroup.

" You may well ask: "Why direct action? Why sit-ins, marches, and so forth? Isn't negotiation a better path?" You are quite right in calling for negotiation. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action. Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent-resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word "tension." I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth. Just as Socrates felt that it was necessary to create a tension in the mind so that individuals could rise from the bondage of myths and halftruths to the unfettered realm of creative analysis and objective appraisal, so must we see the need for nonviolent gadflies to create the kind of tension in society that will help men rise from the dark depths of prejudice and racism to the majestic heights of understanding and brotherhood.

The purpose of our direct-action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation. I therefore concur with you in your call for negotiation. Too long has our beloved Southland been bogged down in a tragic effort to live in monologue rather than dialogue.

We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor, it must be demanded by the oppressed. Frankly, I have yet to engage in a direct-action campaign that was "well timed" in view of those who have not suffered unduly from the disease of segregation. For years now I have heard the word "wait!" It rings in the ear of every Negro with piercing familiarity. This "Wait" has almost always meant "Never." We must come to see, with one of our distinguished jurists, that "justice too long delayed is justice denied." "

--------------
If your support for equal rights is conditional, based on whether you personally think some people are "nice" enough to deserve equal rights to what you have, you haven't quite mastered the concept. Rich straight white Christian men get their rights even if they are complete assholes, I notice. But some folks only "deserve" to have those rights "given" to them if they "act right." (And then they wonder why oppressed folks get pissed off. Go figure.)

activists welcomed anyone who wanted to stand with them. They did not turn anger on their supporters.

Nothing in my statement indicates I believe rights are conditional. My SUPPORT is.
Fortunately, I know real live GLBTs that I care very deeply for. They hold a bigger sway on my perceptions than the hate spewers at DU. However, if I didn't have that first hand knowledge, my opinion would be QUITE different.

All your gay friends hate you. They told me not to tell you, but I thought you deserved to know.

You should think about taking a cold shower or something. Or keep going. Maybe tonight you can earn a ts.

You're a laugh riot.

You say that the "hate spewers" on DU make you question your support for our community, but you also state that you recognize that GLBT DUers are not representative of the gay people you personally know.

Then why would anything that WE say convince you that you may not want to support our struggle? :shrug:

was my ONLY experience, I would not lift a finger. Really.

I believe in YOUR rights because I care about EVERYONE's rights. Would it be so terrible if the current civil rights struggle of the GLBT community elevates the rights of EVERYONE? That's all the article suggests, as I read it.

If GLBTs don't care about EVERYONE's rights, they are fighting the wrong battle.
And maybe there is a clue why we still struggle. Too much selfishness.

One of my gay friends has a friend in Russia. He fears for his LIFE daily. So, yeah, when I see a bunch of mean whiny DUers spewing hate FOR ALMOST TWO MONTHS, and even against people who SUPPORT THEM, I have to work to maintain my priorities.

I'm human. Sue me.

and gosh darn it, they don't understand what it's like to have REAL problems. Are you trying for some kinda worst-supporter-ever award I don't know about?

Do you seriously not get that being denied the right to marry can be a death sentence for a person who can't get on their partner's health insurance? You don't get that gay people fear for their lives daily ... that for some gay people - JUST LIKE FOR SOME STRAIGHT PEOPLE - the marriage is about more than wanting to walk down an aisle and throw rice around at a party, that it's about getting life-saving medication that they can't otherwise afford?

Gay people are dying over this shit, while the self-righteous "supporters" are accusing them of whining and having the wrong priorities at the wrong time.

Only gays don't have insurance? Really? I've been on the verge of bronchitis for a week now. I can't go to the DOCTOR! Having no insurance puts you in a BIG GROUP, dude.

And yeah. It is disgustingly whiny to expect stuff just because you're homosexual. You deserve it because you're HUMAN. Maybe start with getting that part down.

Not a single person here has asked for special gay rights. They have asked not to be DENIED certain rights on that basis.

So, yes, please do start with getting the fact that the GLBT community deserves the same rights as all those other humans - because they are human. It would be great if people came to DU understanding that, instead of quoting and linking articles that claim it's "stupid" for gays to demand the same rights that those other humans take for granted.

Thank you (again) for your "support" in calling gays "disgustingly whiny" for expecting the same rights those nonhomosexual humans have.

I've been told that any issues I may have pale in comparison to the plight of GLBTs.
That amounts to rights above and beyond what any human deserves. Yes, it does. That's why it is so distasteful. The message is, only YOUR rights matter.

I do not doubt, however, that that's how you interpreted what people wrote.

but it's been deleted. I have no reason to lie.

but I think you might be prone to misinterpretation and/or hyperbole, based on your assertion that you were a victim of "violence" because someone typed a mean message to you on a message board.

tried to have an attack post deleted at DU? It is not easy. They are pretty strict and don't go around deleting willy nilly. If you don't trust my ability to read, then why am I talking to you.

I had times where I was pissed off about the attacks, too.

But I didn't go around equating that experience to being the victim of a violent crime; that's dismissive and insulting to people who really are victims of violent crimes and emotional abuse. I even had someone physically threaten me on their blog and map out their fantasy of killing me, in detail, as a result of a post I made on DU. Even at that, I didn't describe it as me actually being "a victim of violence."

I'm trying to sort out the levels of reaction you have to different situations here, and it's not making sense to me.

Someone posts a meanie comment about you on a forum = you are a victim of violence.

Someone actively works to discriminate against gays and successfully campaigns to prevent them from having the right to marry - is that more or less serious than typing a mean message on a forum? Which are you expressing more outrage over?

Someone publicly states that gays are like pedophiles ... more or less serious than the meanie comment about you on a message board? Does a comment like that make all gays "victims of violence"?

The levels of outrage seem disproportionate to me. You seem (and maybe this is just in this one thread) far more concerned about mean comments typed by anonymous strangers than you do about the denial of human rights to a whole group of people, and you seem more concerned with their reaction to that discrimination than you do about the discrimination itself.

Personally, I want to see you be that pissed off at Warren. It seems to me that's who your anger should be directed at.

I would say you are a victim of violence, both in denying your rights and with the death wish.
It doesn't have to be one or the other. We weren't talking about degrees.

I don't know how you concluded what my concern priorities are. However, minimizing other people's suffering does not help your own, which is one thing we were discussin.

I am outraged about Warren for MORE THAN his anti-gay stance. Of course he doesn't believe in equal rights! He's a dirty nasty BIGOT.

I don't have a beef with you. I really care about all humans on some level. If I made the rules, we would all have all the freedoms and liberties that God gave us. Yes, I believe he gave gay (and all) people the right to love one another in any way they choose.

But to be fair, you need to understand that Warren has traits that hurt more than just our GLBT communities. Is it *more serious* to sentence Africans to an AIDS death for lack of education? Or oppose gay marriage? Rhetorical. This was one of my complaints. A lack of sight on the behalf of much of the Vocal GLBT DU community. It goes beyond you. Sorry you are so wrapped up in your own self you cannot care about others. I don't think that's a winning strategy. For any of us.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8019678

you shouldn't make assumptions about people.

And this is a fine example of you misinterpreting what's been said to fit your concept of what you think people are saying. So here you are lecturing me on the notion that Warren has "traits" (I call them actions) that hurt more than the GLBT community. No shit. I brought that up myself in another post in this thread.


"Sorry you are so wrapped up in your own self you cannot care about others." You really are a piece of work.

I know the first thing I do when "supporting" a cause is assume that anyone fighting for it doesn't care about anyone else or any other causes, and the second thing I do is assume that they only care about it because it affects them directly. Then I like to belittle them for the things I made up in my own head about them.

(Sadly, I think those sorts of assumptions say more about your beliefs of what motivates people than anything else.)

I was TOLD. Down thread. It comes across over and over on the pages of DU. Maybe not YOU, personally, but YOU as a group at DU, fit the profile I stated. SOME people here need to realize it is more than about a marriage license for THEM. That does not MINIMIZE their pain. There is still much to be done. But selfishness and alienation are not the path.

This was not about me "as a group" - it was directed personally to me. "Sorry you are so wrapped up in your own self you cannot care about others."

Be honest. You "assumed" that I am pissed off about gay marriage rights because it affects me directly in some way. That says more about you than about me.

Aside from that, you are being horribly offensive in referring to struggles by oppressed groups to gain equal rights as "selfish."

Again, I recommend looking at your own posts and reflecting on why people are telling you they don't need your kind of "support."

I'm done seeing "you're" side. eom

Civil rights are being denied because we are gay.

Boys that are a little too effeminate or girls that are too masculine, by the standards of society at large. Gay and lesbian couples that fear showing any public affection, which straight couples often take for granted, for fear of getting the shit kicked out of them, or worse. Transexuals that just happened to have the luck of being born in the wrong body, and are killed when their lovers discover their secret (especially MTF transgendereds). Elderly couples, that have been together for decades, where one partner cannot get health insurance for their loved one, dooming their partner to a death without medical treatment...coverage that would be provided to a heterosexual counterpart without question.

Think about that.

I will grant you that gay people in America have it a bit easier compared to our brothers and sisters in other countries. I don't question that at all. But that does not mean that the demand and needs for our rights in this country is any less valid.

in hs was a cross dresser, gay .. I don't know all the right descriptors. We had a talent show at the end of our senior year, and he did an EXCELLENT Diana Ross. Most of the football players walked out of the bleachers and made a ruckus. He carried a knife in his boot. He was killed within two years of graduation. Flagpole Hill in Dallas. Ever hear of it? Tragic. Don't have to tell me that gays have to fear for their lives. That's why the anger and hate here do not make sense. This is life or death and some are getting all irate that someone suggests there might be something beyond MARRIAGE that GLBTs are entitled to. No sense.

"I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Councilor or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says, "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another mans freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro the wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating that absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.

I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that law and order exist for the purpose of establishing justice and that when they fail in this purpose they become the dangerously structured dams that block the flow of social progress. I had hoped that the white moderate would understand that the present tension in the South is a necessary phase of the transition from an obnoxious negative peace, in which the Negro passively accepted his unjust plight, to a substantive and positive peace, in which all men will respect the dignity and worth of human personality. Actually, we who engage in nonviolent direct action are not the creators of tension. We merely bring to the surface the hidden tension that is already alive. We bring it out in the open, where it can be seen and dealt with. Like a boil that can never be cured so long as it is covered up but must be opened with all it ugliness to the natural medicines of air and light injustice must be exposed with all the tension its exposure creates, to the light of human conscience and the air of national opinion, before it can be cured."

to attack your supporters. Read down thread. MLK didn't ATTACK the "lukewarm".
(However, on civil rights, I am NOT "lukewarm".)

Thank you for posting the quotes. I think they make the point that the hate spewing here was not MLK's method.

I'm thinking no. But perhaps you could get a second opinion from that Russian guy who fears for his life daily, that knows that black gay friend you have.

Yes. I consider verbal abuse violence. And minimizing another's suffering is considered selfish, at LEAST.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Your "support" seems at best paper-thin anyway.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Fuck that noise.

Enjoy your visit!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:rofl:

a woman and not a troll. i only thought what Bob Ostertag wrote made some sense to me. sorry for offending anyone here, that was not my intention.

are real, been wearing them year-round since the 70's

The only thing better would be if the handle were something like Moonflower Starchild.

How's that for angst?

"Oh, who cares anyway?", is pretty much the sentiment. "This is actually a good thing! Yay!".

It's always tempting to blow things off and convince yourself that everything's worked out for the best, especially when you aren't personally being inconvenienced. He talks about building coalitions with other groups, like unmarried, straight "hipsters" (I don't see what the basis for a coalition is there, btw)-- but really, all he's doing is throwing that coalition under the bus and urging everyone to just move on and be happy.

:puke:

Marriage equality, and not having to worry about being forcibly divorced from my wife by Proposition 8 (thanks bigots :sarcasm:), would help me get over my angst. Being told to just accept being a second-class citizen tends to piss me off.

makes some good points. My disagreement with Warren goes way beyond his gay bashing.

Welcome to DU. You're going to get the premier initiation in this thread, betcha :hi:

ps.. It will also become obvious that DU has MANY more writers than readers.

nt

both that he made some good points, and that there are many more writers than readers.

that the young folk have gone all bourgeois.

"We were radicals determined to bring down the nuclear family!" he shouts, "and you young kids today, you just want to get married. Why can't you be more like us? Damn kids, get off my lawn!"

You made the point of the author. :thumbsup:

of their own self-indulgent, self-absorbed generation and griping about everyone who came after them.

Not interested in hearing more variations on that theme.

As are others welcome to hate you. Just remember, you cannot expect from others what you are not willing to give yourself.

If you live long enough, you'll be old too. It's not an option.

who think that they represent the height of earthly achievement and everyone who came after them doesn't quite measure up.

Maybe it was. At least there were liberal politicians in those days. Taking stands.
You may have enjoyed that.

Unfortunately, I came along after most of those people had sold out and become the establishment they once hated.

(I came along in the 80s, so I am not exactly young myself. But I did get tired of my professors lecturing me--a blue-collar kid struggling to pay for college--from their perspective of bourgeois privilege, on why we just didn't quite measure up to them. I still resent that attitude. In fact, part of my dissertation deals with the class assumptions of academia, so I guess those people did give me something useful after all.)

"I came along after most of those people had sold out and become the establishment they once hated."

Yup-- those are some rather petulant and hypocritical people right there. Almost as petulant and hypocritical as the youth sitting in front of game consoles systems all weekend long these days. I mean, since we're trading anecdotal evidence and all-- six of one, half a dozen of the other.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

You CAN get married. There are states where you can marry. I really support equal rights, but nasty people like you make it very difficult to do so.

Civil rights are not won by whining and being mean to people. Read a history book.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

you never get what you want.

I didn't say there was nothing to complain about. I said you weren't being completely honest.
You answer shows that gaining marriage rights in California is not the answer.
Exactly the point of the article you're using to flame.

Getting married was by far the best thing ever to happen in my life.

And it was my own generation that got "too bourgeoisie", I think the younger kids are doing better in some ways than we did.

Your broad brush is not appreciated.

dont paint with such a broad brush.

;)

understand people who think they gain respect by spewing hatred.

on a site that I had once viewed as a safe space, and my own party is choosing to elevate to National Pastor status a man who says that I might as well be out fucking children.

It's hard to play Little Suzy Sunshine right now, but I will try harder.

visceral anger is not the solution. It saddens me to see so much anger still on display.
I so hope that the GLBT contingency at DU is not representative of GLBTs at large.
If it is, we will never make the gains we all want. Anger and attacks breed anger. Not a winner.

I don't mean just this weekend, but for more than a year, since the McClurkin abomination, when we were told, over and over again, to sit down and shut up.

That's been the standard treatment of us--and anyone else who dissents from the Obama is Perfect line--ever since.

Well, it turns out we got McClurkin II with the Warren fiasco. We were right. For more than a year we have been told to sit down and shut up, and we were right.

The anger you are seeing comes from a strong sense of betrayal. For my part, I am not as mad at Obama as I am at the people right here at DU who have been accusing us of "poutrage" and "faux indignation" for more than a year.

I'm sorry to snap at you. This has not been an easy few weeks. Every time I start thinking maybe things are getting better for us, something comes along like Amendment 2 here in Florida, or like my party knocking me in the dirt in its rush to suck up to the likes of Rick Warren. And while one would think that DU would be a refuge, quite the opposite is true.

and will continue to do so. He is wrong for ALL OF US for a number of issues.

You're okay. I'm not upset. Thanks for your words of reconciliation.
DU disillusionment is 'normal'.

I read a lot of the GLBT threads about Obama during the primaries and election cycle. It was OBVIOUS he is not the solution to this dilemma even then.

There does come a time when reactive anger has to be replaced with constructive movement.
Those who want to stew in their hate, may choose to do so. Others will be informed enough to move forward. I have hope. I don't just want "marriage" for you all. I want ALL rights guaranteed and enforced. Which, is what I thought the object of the article was. I want MORE for you than you even want for yourself.

You have an oppressed minority telling you in no uncertain terms what they want: the right to marry. (among other things)

And you as a person with that privilege, are telling them, look, I know what's best for you, you all are misguided and not as smart about your own needs as I am about your needs.

Do you see any sort of potential problem with this? Do you think that attitude might be remotely related to why some aren't welcoming your "support" with welcome arms?

at someone who is new and just trying to help. It is the AUTHOR of the article that suggests there might be MORE than marriage at stake here. I do not have a problem wishing MORE for you than marriage. I feel that some just react to what they perceive is an attack that isn't REALLY an attack. I suggest that over reacting with hate and anger without benefit of logical discussion is a LOSER.

It is hurting the cause of HUMAN rights, and I do strongly object to that.

I'm sorry some are scorning my support. Evidently, they believe they can win by killing their own troops. That tells me that we are further away from equality than I had hoped.

But you know, we are bringing the hidden tension to the surface. Just as MLK suggested. Maybe the controversy I raise will further the cause.

You need to learn to "support."

And to do that, you need to listen. This is where "missionaries" so often fail, and I don't just mean religious missionaries, but do-gooders in general. They go to an area, they decide (as an outsider) what is best for the locals, and start trying to implement their ideas. And so we end up with US programs that spend lots of money buying chickens to create a supply of eggs for people in Africa - who don't eat eggs for religious reasons. We end up with missionaries like that Warren ass who is "solving" aids by not teaching about safe sex or providing condoms.

The noob who is trying to "help" the GLBT community get over its second class status and feel good about honoring the bigots who are working to remove their rights is also going to find that that sort of "support" is not needed.

Start from the premise that the GLBT community knows better than you what their needs are. Let that sink in - it's a hard thing to grasp if you have an ego. They know better than you do what THEIR needs are.

Drop the paternalistic attitude. Stop telling them what they should feel in response to being discriminated against. You might find a lot less animosity directed toward you.

I see it less as anger and more as a frustration brought on by getting sold out by allies.

(I hope we straights on DU are not representative of the straights at large-- if so, the GLBT community has a much bigger fight in store than previously perceived...)

Or I'll smack you with my organic cane.

the elephant in the room. Gay "Marriage" is a right to full class citizenship. Not the right to walk down the aisle, and I'm sure he knows that. It may be unfortunate that the stumbling block to equal rights is cloaked in the word 'marriage', but it is. I think that this is a perfect storm brewed up from Obama choosing the absolutely worst person, at the worst possible time, to appear in the worst possible venue.

In what possible way did you imagine linking to this heaping pile of festering shit would help people "get over their angst"?

This might very well be the stupidest post I have ever seen.

"Oh well, it's the wrong issue anyway. Those people don't really need to get married. What's all the fuss about?"

and the guy who wrote this article needs to read it too.
Here are some of the legal rights that married couples have and gays and lesbians are denied:

1. Joint parental rights of children
2. Joint adoption
3. Status as "next-of-kin" for hospital visits and medical decisions
4. Right to make a decision about the disposal of loved ones remains
5. Immigration and residency for partners from other countries
6. Crime victims recovery benefits
7. Domestic violence protection orders
8. Judicial protections and immunity
9. Automatic inheritance in the absence of a will
10. Public safety officers death benefits
11. Spousal veterans benefits
12. Social Security
13. Medicare
14. Joint filing of tax returns
15. Wrongful death benefits for surviving partner and children
16. Bereavement or sick leave to care for partner or children
17. Child support
18. Joint Insurance Plans
19. Tax credits including: Child tax credit, Hope and lifetime learning credits
20. Deferred Compensation for pension and IRAs
21. Estate and gift tax benefits
22. Welfare and public assistance
23. Joint housing for elderly
24. Credit protection
25. Medical care for survivors and dependents of certain veterans

These are just a few of the 1400 state and federal benefits that gays and lesbians are denied by not being able to marry. Most of these benefits cannot be privately arranged or contracted for within the legal system.












http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/wedding/f/MarriageBenefit.htm

The author of the article linked in the OP stated that gay marriage is a "stupid issue." So why are you going on about the rights and such? Why can't you just get over it?

:sarcasm:

i do support gay marriage and equal rights for all.

YES, let's forget about gay marriage for a second and focus on other, more positive aspects. Let's make lemonade out of our lemons.

Let's see:

Rick Warren is a front man for the Dominionist movement, with the institution of biblical law as its ultimate goal. Good-bye social programs, hello slavery! Executions for everyone. Sounds like a PLAN!

Women's rights? Sure, every woman has a right to answer to her Master! Every woman and her three sister-wives, that is.

Bless his efforts to keep African men and women from receiving access to education, birth control and abortion. Not everyone can achieve the lofty goal of contributing to the plight of millions of orphans as their parents die of aids in droves.

I feel sooooo much better now about his presence at the inauguration. We look GOOD to the world.

Fuck you and fuck Osertag

If Ostertag thinks everyone "except gays" are celebrating, his head is up his ass. Many, many people besides gays are protesting this hateful schmuck being at the inauguration.



Too bad this "new generation of evangelicals" wasn't invited! Just another old school, gay bashing, misogynist bigot.



What's that? STFU, equal rights don't matter? For 30 years, hateful busy bodies of Warren's ilk have chipped away at everyone's rights, and we're expected to embrace them?!!

O.k. four issues.



I for one have seen nothing from ANY gay marriage opponent to suggest otherwise. How Ostertag's piece made sense to you is beyond me. It's essentially telling gays to forget about their struggle to gain equal rights while we clean up the environment. How long do you propose that will take?


spell edit

but there is something to be said for anti-assimilationism. Matt Sycamore does some good writing about that; she wrote a queer-rights book called "That's Revolting!"
http://www.mattildabernsteinsycamore.com/
Check it out if you want to.

Yes, I'd say it is one of the many right issues. Along with adoption rights, the ability to make a living free of discrimination, serve in the armed forces and other institutions of responsibility. That is the crux of the problem. The Rick Warrens of the world do not want this, because it makes their argument of homosexuality being a societal ill all the more problematic. As well as the corallary argument, foistered on rapidly-deteriorating assumptions about the moral value of human beings who are gay, that anyone objecting to the "societal ill" argument or who seeks to promote inclusion is part of a nefarious agenda.

Think about it for a moment. How nefarious can an agenda be if all it is demanding is the ability for people to get married, raise families, work, and positively contribute to their communities and/or nation? If you are not beginning with the bigoted assumption that the people in question are a corrupting influence on society, this argument makes no sense. It is completely counter-intuitive. So when confronted with it, many liberals will ask "How will two gay people getting married hurt my marriage?" That isn't the right question. The right question is this: What does a person have to believe in order to think two gay people getting married will hurt their marriage?

What the Gay Rights movement is doing now is in the same vein as what the Abolitionist movement did to slavery, and their history can be instructive. Abolitionists connected slavery to the destruction of families, which was considered the throne of Christian ethics. Recent arguments against gay rights have attempted linking inclusiveness with this very same theme. The purpose of marriage is to raise childrem, and children need a mother and a father.

But now we are seeing a reversal of this argument. It is discrimination against homosexuals that destroys families. It is threatening to destroy approximately 18,000 families as I write this. And not just in terms of marriage rights or adoption rights, but homophobia itself strains the relationships between parents, children, and siblings. It causes parents to worry whether or not their gay children will be safe in a world that is inhospitable toward them. It forces children to hide their sexuality from their parents and siblings for fear of rejection. It puts heterosexual siblings in the position of either defending a family member or being excluded themselves.

Liberal Churches across the country have been coming to grips with this over the past two decades, and the results have been very clear. Conservative evangelicals have not. Warren has not. They have actively fought against it with all their money and will. To expect that they will miraculously "come around" in a matter of years is delusional. To expect homosexuals to wait generations for them to do so, just to avoid confrontation, is unreasonable.

And to offer donuts in lieu of basic recognition of another's humanity is being an outrageous asshole.

looks like shit...

And how fitting his head is completely bald.

Not even worth the time to explain why this is nonsense.

gays have been compared to pedophiles in his church and those who commit incest. he also doesnt allow gays in his church

They just choose not to... Hipsters may not get married, but that is a self imposed issue, not outlawed

:eyes:

You don't sound particularly for it, either.

This article is hogwash. No one who is without rights is going to "get over" diddly until they get the rights that are being wrongfully denied.

Warren hates women and Jewish people too, by the way. As is often the case with bigots, they hate more than one group.

Here's the gist. It basically says that gay people shouldn't fight for their own rights of marriage, which would only require very small changes in the law, unless and until they are able to overcome an insurmountable task that maybe Hercules would be up for of making sure there is no suffering in the world. Until they conquer the impossible task of making the world better for everyone else, they don't get anything for themselves.

That whole line of thinking is just plain wrong.

has to say. Thanks for the link!

Is that correct? He says he has several male partners, a child and that child has two moms.

Um, I'm sorry, I have no problem if that works for everyone, but he is speaking not from a point of common ground with any arrangement which I have. So I'm not sure why he thinks he speaks on my behalf, as a gay man.