nbcrusader
Blue Crack Addict
All (okay, most) Churches welcome sinners - because we all are sinners and there is no hierarchy of sin. Most don't go on and tell you that it is not sin.
MERGED (yet again): All Gay Marriage Discussion Here Please
- Thread starter MrsSpringsteen
- Start date
The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
- Status
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
LivLuvAndBootlegMusic said:
I see.
Angela
[Q]Boston's Black Church Leaders Reject Gay Marriage
February 10, 2004
Michael Christopher Bryan
Three of Boston's largest black clergy organizations issued a joint statement on Saturday, opposing same-sex marriage, both in the state of Massachusetts and the rest of the country, the Boston Globe reported.
In their statement, the Boston Ten Point Coalition, the Cambridge Black Pastors and the Black Ministerial Alliance, groups whose collective influence is said to hold great moral sway in the Boston minority community, said the quest for gay marriage has nothing to do with civil rights, and asked the legislature "to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage."
"We acknowledge the pain and suffering of the men and women in the gay and lesbian community who are in long-term relationships," the black clergy statement read in part. "However, given the most recent opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court eliminating the possibility of civil Unions, we support the call for a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman."
In response, the region's black gay and lesbian leaders acted quickly to create an as yet unnamed organization they say will "seek to end their invisibility within the black church."
"Martin Luther King is rolling over in his grave at a statement like this," state Rep. Byron Rushing, a Boston Democrat and an active Episcopal layman, told the Globe.
"[The Coalition is] not acknowledging the responsibility that any people have who have been able to struggle and gain civil rights, which is that you have to then support others who are seeking civil rights," said Rushing.
Bishop Gilbert A. Thompson Sr., pastor of the New Covenant Christian Church in the Boston area, said "homosexuality is a choice [and that] to say there is such a thing as a gay Christian is saying there's an honest thief."
"Their terminology and reasoning is similar to that of segregationists and racists who have worked hard to keep blacks from attaining full citizenship," Jacquie Bishop, 39, of Boston, told the Globe on Saturday. [/Q]
February 10, 2004
Michael Christopher Bryan
Three of Boston's largest black clergy organizations issued a joint statement on Saturday, opposing same-sex marriage, both in the state of Massachusetts and the rest of the country, the Boston Globe reported.
In their statement, the Boston Ten Point Coalition, the Cambridge Black Pastors and the Black Ministerial Alliance, groups whose collective influence is said to hold great moral sway in the Boston minority community, said the quest for gay marriage has nothing to do with civil rights, and asked the legislature "to amend the state constitution to ban same-sex marriage."
"We acknowledge the pain and suffering of the men and women in the gay and lesbian community who are in long-term relationships," the black clergy statement read in part. "However, given the most recent opinion of the Supreme Judicial Court eliminating the possibility of civil Unions, we support the call for a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman."
In response, the region's black gay and lesbian leaders acted quickly to create an as yet unnamed organization they say will "seek to end their invisibility within the black church."
"Martin Luther King is rolling over in his grave at a statement like this," state Rep. Byron Rushing, a Boston Democrat and an active Episcopal layman, told the Globe.
"[The Coalition is] not acknowledging the responsibility that any people have who have been able to struggle and gain civil rights, which is that you have to then support others who are seeking civil rights," said Rushing.
Bishop Gilbert A. Thompson Sr., pastor of the New Covenant Christian Church in the Boston area, said "homosexuality is a choice [and that] to say there is such a thing as a gay Christian is saying there's an honest thief."
"Their terminology and reasoning is similar to that of segregationists and racists who have worked hard to keep blacks from attaining full citizenship," Jacquie Bishop, 39, of Boston, told the Globe on Saturday. [/Q]
[Q]Black church history comes out of the closet
Think the MCC is the only gay and lesbian Christian movement? Think again. For years, the UFC and Fellowship 2000 have ministered to black gay men and lesbians. Sadly, many members come from black Christian churches?churches formed because their members were not welcome in mainstream denominations because of who they are.
By Herndon L. Davis
An Advocate.com exclusive, posted February 10, 2004
As we reflect on Black History Month, it is essential to also look back at the origins of the black church and its struggle into freedom as it parallels to the current struggle of gay rights today.
We attend church and become more active and visible than most. We tithe, pray, praise, and worship God in spirit and truth, but still we are separated, told we don?t matter, and not given as much say in church matters that count the most because of who we are, gay men and lesbians.
Roll the clock back over 200 years, and you have the exact same thoughts, sentiments, and emotions of black church congregants, who attended church, tithed, prayed, worshipped God in spirit and truth, but were still separated, told they didn?t matter, and were not given a say in church matters that counted the most because of who they were, black men and women.
In each situation both groups attempted to fit in, to go along with the status quo, but both eventually got tired of being sick and tired and splintered off into separate denominations and churches that catered specifically to their spiritual needs as reflected by their life-experiences and culture.
As a result, we have churches that are inclusive of gays and lesbians that specifically minister to their needs, experiences, and culture alongside churches that specifically minister to the needs, culture, and experiences of the black community at large.
In short, we have gay and lesbian churches and we have black churches, both splintered movements of a resistant mainstream. Both groups were oppressed, both groups were frustrated, both groups worshipped and praised God, and both groups were separated and treated with indignity.
In the case of the black church, the genesis of the first splintered movement began in 1786 at St. George?s Episcopal Methodist Church in Philadelphia. When Absalom Jones and Richard Allen kneeled down to pray to a God they knew not to be a ?respecter of persons,? they were rudely interrupted and told they had to go up into the balcony, separated from their white congregants.
The event spurred Jones to eventually leave in 1793 to form the African Methodist Episcopal Church denomination. Similar incidents of isolation and discontent caused James Varick, Peter Williams, and Charles Rush to charter the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in 1796 in New York.
The South was no different. The then-Colored Methodist Episcopalians, now known as the Christian Methodist Episcopalians, was formed as a result of a schism between Northern and Southern states over theology regarding slavery. Black congregants formed their own denomination in order to minister to their needs, culture and experiences.
In the 1880s 150 black Baptist pastors met in Montgomery, Ala., to form the Baptist Mission Convention. By 1895 it had merged with two other conventions to form the National Baptist Convention of the United States of America. Up until then, attempts to form all-black Baptist church associations and conventions were not allowed.
Now fast-forward to today from a black gay and lesbian perspective. Identical splinter spiritual movements have also occurred?breaking away from the mainstream, established black church. In 1985 Unity Fellow Church was founded in California. Today this spiritual movement has grown and now includes 15 congregations in cities across America, ministering directly to the needs, life experiences, and culture of the black gay and lesbian community.
In addition, another movement, Fellowship 2000, which was founded five years ago, is taking a slightly different but still powerful approach to ministering to our needs. The movement is actually a multidenominational fellowship of mostly African-American churches ranging from ultraconservative to liberal with the goal of embracing and implementing ?radical inclusivity? within their congregations.
Ironically, both of these black spiritual movements occurred outside of the realm of the mostly white gay and lesbian Metropolitan Community Church movement. This highlights the fact that there is obviously a need if not a demand for a ?just like me? understanding and tolerance that must exist before spiritual growth can occur in the lives of many of us.
Both UFC and Fellowship 2000 now are flourishing and vibrant organisms that meet this demand and fill this void in the lives of black gays and lesbians across the country.
Again, identical to our ancestors, we got tired of being sick and tired and being meted out the same harsh segregation, intense resistance, and blatant disregard of our emotions, life experiences, and culture. Ironically, the mainstream black church of today became the oppressors in our lives. The roles were reversed. Our black pastors and bishops became our captives and we are, as gays and lesbians were for many years, their willing and helpless victims.
Too many of us took the abuse and shrugged it off when the gay-bashing sermons came our way. We quietly thought to ourselves, I deserve it, and then moved on. Sadly, many of us still have that particular slave mentality. Although we may not take physical abuse, the emotional, verbal, and spiritual abuse we do take is far worse, more painful, and significantly more devastating as it drives and eventually destroys our lives.
As a result, many black gay men marry women because their pastor or bishop told them to. Many black lesbians marry men because their pastor or bishop said they would go to hell if they didn?t. Many marriages have been based on lies, STD?s have crept into bedrooms, and innocent children have been caught in the middle, all because pastors and bishops threatened, screamed, challenged, and abused their spiritual authority over their flock.
Unless we stand up and speak out to the black church and demand a relook, reconsideration, and a refreshed analysis of scripture, spirituality, and our lives as godly men and women who also happen to be gay and lesbian, we will forever be doomed to the abusive and bloodied hands of condemnation of the black church.
There is a bright and glowing rainbow?no pun intended?on the flip side of the entire situation. Our independent spiritual movements (UFC and Fellowship 2000) will continue to flourish as we continue to seek God in spirit and in truth, allowing the Holy Spirit to move within our beings to display the love, compassion, and tolerance that Jesus Christ displayed when he walked on earth.
Hence the old saying is true: ?If you don?t know your past, you?re doomed to repeat it. " [/Q]
Think the MCC is the only gay and lesbian Christian movement? Think again. For years, the UFC and Fellowship 2000 have ministered to black gay men and lesbians. Sadly, many members come from black Christian churches?churches formed because their members were not welcome in mainstream denominations because of who they are.
By Herndon L. Davis
An Advocate.com exclusive, posted February 10, 2004
As we reflect on Black History Month, it is essential to also look back at the origins of the black church and its struggle into freedom as it parallels to the current struggle of gay rights today.
We attend church and become more active and visible than most. We tithe, pray, praise, and worship God in spirit and truth, but still we are separated, told we don?t matter, and not given as much say in church matters that count the most because of who we are, gay men and lesbians.
Roll the clock back over 200 years, and you have the exact same thoughts, sentiments, and emotions of black church congregants, who attended church, tithed, prayed, worshipped God in spirit and truth, but were still separated, told they didn?t matter, and were not given a say in church matters that counted the most because of who they were, black men and women.
In each situation both groups attempted to fit in, to go along with the status quo, but both eventually got tired of being sick and tired and splintered off into separate denominations and churches that catered specifically to their spiritual needs as reflected by their life-experiences and culture.
As a result, we have churches that are inclusive of gays and lesbians that specifically minister to their needs, experiences, and culture alongside churches that specifically minister to the needs, culture, and experiences of the black community at large.
In short, we have gay and lesbian churches and we have black churches, both splintered movements of a resistant mainstream. Both groups were oppressed, both groups were frustrated, both groups worshipped and praised God, and both groups were separated and treated with indignity.
In the case of the black church, the genesis of the first splintered movement began in 1786 at St. George?s Episcopal Methodist Church in Philadelphia. When Absalom Jones and Richard Allen kneeled down to pray to a God they knew not to be a ?respecter of persons,? they were rudely interrupted and told they had to go up into the balcony, separated from their white congregants.
The event spurred Jones to eventually leave in 1793 to form the African Methodist Episcopal Church denomination. Similar incidents of isolation and discontent caused James Varick, Peter Williams, and Charles Rush to charter the African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church in 1796 in New York.
The South was no different. The then-Colored Methodist Episcopalians, now known as the Christian Methodist Episcopalians, was formed as a result of a schism between Northern and Southern states over theology regarding slavery. Black congregants formed their own denomination in order to minister to their needs, culture and experiences.
In the 1880s 150 black Baptist pastors met in Montgomery, Ala., to form the Baptist Mission Convention. By 1895 it had merged with two other conventions to form the National Baptist Convention of the United States of America. Up until then, attempts to form all-black Baptist church associations and conventions were not allowed.
Now fast-forward to today from a black gay and lesbian perspective. Identical splinter spiritual movements have also occurred?breaking away from the mainstream, established black church. In 1985 Unity Fellow Church was founded in California. Today this spiritual movement has grown and now includes 15 congregations in cities across America, ministering directly to the needs, life experiences, and culture of the black gay and lesbian community.
In addition, another movement, Fellowship 2000, which was founded five years ago, is taking a slightly different but still powerful approach to ministering to our needs. The movement is actually a multidenominational fellowship of mostly African-American churches ranging from ultraconservative to liberal with the goal of embracing and implementing ?radical inclusivity? within their congregations.
Ironically, both of these black spiritual movements occurred outside of the realm of the mostly white gay and lesbian Metropolitan Community Church movement. This highlights the fact that there is obviously a need if not a demand for a ?just like me? understanding and tolerance that must exist before spiritual growth can occur in the lives of many of us.
Both UFC and Fellowship 2000 now are flourishing and vibrant organisms that meet this demand and fill this void in the lives of black gays and lesbians across the country.
Again, identical to our ancestors, we got tired of being sick and tired and being meted out the same harsh segregation, intense resistance, and blatant disregard of our emotions, life experiences, and culture. Ironically, the mainstream black church of today became the oppressors in our lives. The roles were reversed. Our black pastors and bishops became our captives and we are, as gays and lesbians were for many years, their willing and helpless victims.
Too many of us took the abuse and shrugged it off when the gay-bashing sermons came our way. We quietly thought to ourselves, I deserve it, and then moved on. Sadly, many of us still have that particular slave mentality. Although we may not take physical abuse, the emotional, verbal, and spiritual abuse we do take is far worse, more painful, and significantly more devastating as it drives and eventually destroys our lives.
As a result, many black gay men marry women because their pastor or bishop told them to. Many black lesbians marry men because their pastor or bishop said they would go to hell if they didn?t. Many marriages have been based on lies, STD?s have crept into bedrooms, and innocent children have been caught in the middle, all because pastors and bishops threatened, screamed, challenged, and abused their spiritual authority over their flock.
Unless we stand up and speak out to the black church and demand a relook, reconsideration, and a refreshed analysis of scripture, spirituality, and our lives as godly men and women who also happen to be gay and lesbian, we will forever be doomed to the abusive and bloodied hands of condemnation of the black church.
There is a bright and glowing rainbow?no pun intended?on the flip side of the entire situation. Our independent spiritual movements (UFC and Fellowship 2000) will continue to flourish as we continue to seek God in spirit and in truth, allowing the Holy Spirit to move within our beings to display the love, compassion, and tolerance that Jesus Christ displayed when he walked on earth.
Hence the old saying is true: ?If you don?t know your past, you?re doomed to repeat it. " [/Q]
ILuvLarryMullen
Rock n' Roll Doggie ALL ACCESS
sociology
Ok, I don't have any sources for anything about to say cause it's all stuff that i've remembered from my college sociology classes (I'm a sociology major). If you REALLY want some sources or think I'm making things up or whatever I'll find them, but I'd rather not go searching around for things that I already know (plus I am lazy
)
From Livluv
There has not been a ton of research on the topic that I'm aware of, but research so far has not shown any ill effects on children raised by same sex couples. They are not more likely to become gay (though females are more likely to "experiment" in adolescence [this may be because they don't have the same fear of rejection from their parents for this type of behavior]), nor are they more likely to have failed marriages. Children from single parent familes are the ones most likely to have problems, if the father doesn't provide adequate support. It is important for children's self esteem not to feel rejected by one of their parents, as often happens with absent fathers.
From the article that bls posted:
I found this passage to be very interesting. Sociological research shows that usually poverty causes single parenthood, not the otherway around. Poor men do not make good potential marriage partners, which leads to an insufficient pool of marriagable men. Studies show that marriage is unlikely to occur when spouses can't bring a worthwile financial contribution to the relationship. This is why out fo wedlock birthrates are so high in poor communities.
Single motherhood can also lead to poverty when the mother does not have career skills before having the child and/or quits her job to care for children (although she is only doing what many right-wing groups ask her to do, which is be a homemaker) AND the father does pay adequate child support/alimony.
(for clarification)THIS IN NO WAY MEANS THAT YOU CHILD WILL BE POOR AND MAL-DJUSTED IF YOU ARE A SINGLE PARENT.
From this article the two main problems it addresses for todays families are divorce and out of wedlock/single parent families. While I do agree that they can pose some problems for children, I don't see how homosexual marriage adds to or encourages these problems.
We should be focusing on improving people's ability to pull themselves out of poverty and socializing boys in a way that makes them more nurturing and willing to fulfill the role of father, if we want to encourage what the author of this article sees as a positive family environment.
Yes a main function of marriage is often raising children, but another one of it's central functions is that of a financial arrangement.
Ok, I don't have any sources for anything about to say cause it's all stuff that i've remembered from my college sociology classes (I'm a sociology major). If you REALLY want some sources or think I'm making things up or whatever I'll find them, but I'd rather not go searching around for things that I already know (plus I am lazy
)From Livluv
There has not been a ton of research on the topic that I'm aware of, but research so far has not shown any ill effects on children raised by same sex couples. They are not more likely to become gay (though females are more likely to "experiment" in adolescence [this may be because they don't have the same fear of rejection from their parents for this type of behavior]), nor are they more likely to have failed marriages. Children from single parent familes are the ones most likely to have problems, if the father doesn't provide adequate support. It is important for children's self esteem not to feel rejected by one of their parents, as often happens with absent fathers.
From the article that bls posted:
I found this passage to be very interesting. Sociological research shows that usually poverty causes single parenthood, not the otherway around. Poor men do not make good potential marriage partners, which leads to an insufficient pool of marriagable men. Studies show that marriage is unlikely to occur when spouses can't bring a worthwile financial contribution to the relationship. This is why out fo wedlock birthrates are so high in poor communities.
Single motherhood can also lead to poverty when the mother does not have career skills before having the child and/or quits her job to care for children (although she is only doing what many right-wing groups ask her to do, which is be a homemaker) AND the father does pay adequate child support/alimony.
(for clarification)THIS IN NO WAY MEANS THAT YOU CHILD WILL BE POOR AND MAL-DJUSTED IF YOU ARE A SINGLE PARENT.
From this article the two main problems it addresses for todays families are divorce and out of wedlock/single parent families. While I do agree that they can pose some problems for children, I don't see how homosexual marriage adds to or encourages these problems.
We should be focusing on improving people's ability to pull themselves out of poverty and socializing boys in a way that makes them more nurturing and willing to fulfill the role of father, if we want to encourage what the author of this article sees as a positive family environment.
Yes a main function of marriage is often raising children, but another one of it's central functions is that of a financial arrangement.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Dread, what's your point?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Wow, this is exactly who I want standing at the pulpit every Sunday.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Re: sociology
Exactly. I've never understood that argument. First off, what about all the gay kids that have straight parents? And second, even if it did...so?
Really? Interesting.
I do know one homosexual girl, though, who does fear what her parents will do and say should they find out she's homosexual. She has a strong feeling they'd disown her if they knew.
Also, Dread...those articles are interesting. I find it very odd that black people, who would know quite well what it's like to be discriminated against, whose ancestors fought to make interracial marriage more acceptable among society, are now sitting here saying homosexual marriage shouldn't be recognized. What's up with that?
Also, in response to this quote:
"to say there is such a thing as a gay Christian is saying there's an honest thief."
Dude...that bishop should get to know a few homosexual Christians. They do exist.
Angela
ILuvLarryMullen said:
Exactly. I've never understood that argument. First off, what about all the gay kids that have straight parents? And second, even if it did...so?
Really? Interesting.
I do know one homosexual girl, though, who does fear what her parents will do and say should they find out she's homosexual. She has a strong feeling they'd disown her if they knew.
Also, Dread...those articles are interesting. I find it very odd that black people, who would know quite well what it's like to be discriminated against, whose ancestors fought to make interracial marriage more acceptable among society, are now sitting here saying homosexual marriage shouldn't be recognized. What's up with that?
Also, in response to this quote:
"to say there is such a thing as a gay Christian is saying there's an honest thief."
Dude...that bishop should get to know a few homosexual Christians. They do exist.
Angela
pax
ONE love, blood, life
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
So, I was gone for the weekend.
Didn't anyone come up with a better anti-gay marriage reason than the "Won't somebody please think of the children?" reason?
Didn't anyone come up with a better anti-gay marriage reason than the "Won't somebody please think of the children?" reason?
najeena
War Child
I don't think there IS a good reason. Gay marriage is as inevitable as interracial marriage was, and just as sure to offend. But we can't live in the past, people. If you don't like it, don't watch.
Oh yeah, gay people make GREAT parents. They are very aware of their responsibilies to their kids and their communities. It's the people who don't or won't accept them that cause problems.
Oh yeah, gay people make GREAT parents. They are very aware of their responsibilies to their kids and their communities. It's the people who don't or won't accept them that cause problems.
Last edited:
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
najeena said:
.Angela
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
martha said:
I'm sure you won't be suprised to learn the answer is no.
All we've had is religious objection to gay marriage and while I respect people's right to their religious beliefs, I think we can all agree that in a country with a supposed separation of church and state, laws can't be made based on individual's religious beliefs.
Quite honestly, I've been waiting for months to hear someone come up with a sensible, reasoned argument which isn't based on religious principles, as to why gay marriage would be so terrible. Personally, I think that since such an argument hasn't yet been presented I suspect that many of those who oppose gay marriage do so out of nothing more than homophobia.
FizzingWhizzbees
ONE love, blood, life
najeena said:
Exactly. It annoys me to hear people making the "well kids brought up by gay parents would probably be bullied" argument. Well, Black kids attending a previously all-white school were bullied, but does that mean segregation was a good thing? Women attending colleges that were once exclusively for men were treated badly to begin with, but that's not an argument for denying women access to college.
If society cannot accept people for who they are then it's society which needs to change, not the individuals who are just trying to live their life free from persecution.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
FizzingWhizzbees said:
Which is a failure on the part of the parents of the bullies, who are more than likely straight by the way.
pax
ONE love, blood, life
And, by the way, there is NO evidence that the children of gay parents fare any worse than their counterparts raised by straight parents. The bullying argument is weak because the argument could just as easily be made that ALL bullying is wrong, and for that matter we shouldn't let our children (just to name a few bully-prone examples) do well in school, wear glasses or braces, play a musical instrument, or (if they are a boy) profess disinterest in sports. It's a blame-the-victim mentality, rather than blaming the bullies and the family/culture that raised them that way.
Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
martha said:
Exactly.
And well said, everyone else.
.Angela
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
I think this has become a preaching to the choir thread. The antis have left the building.
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Dread, I didn't know you were a switch-hitter! 
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
Can anyone tell me, even hypothetically, a scenario where your mind would be changed, for either side? Any scientific evidence? Probably not, that would just be dismissed as biased 
I presented a non-religious argument, that was deemed not valid ? I don?t think anyone?s mind will be changed from what they currently believe. I might change my mind if Jesus appeared to me and told me I was wrong, not that anyone would believe that that happened anyway, but who cares as long as I change to your way of thinking?
I presented a non-religious argument, that was deemed not valid ? I don?t think anyone?s mind will be changed from what they currently believe. I might change my mind if Jesus appeared to me and told me I was wrong, not that anyone would believe that that happened anyway, but who cares as long as I change to your way of thinking?
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
Even if you could prove to me that Jesus is against it, it wouldn't matter because the U S of A has a separation of church and state. Jesus is against a lot of things that are legal in this country.
You could change my mind if you showed me solid evidence that proved someone would be harmed by allowing gay marriage, so far no one has.
You could change my mind if you showed me solid evidence that proved someone would be harmed by allowing gay marriage, so far no one has.
Hmm, guess I should start a thread about the whole seperation of church and state thing, as those five words together are not in the Constitution...
martha
Blue Crack Supplier
bonosloveslave said:
Your argument wasn't based on any laws at all; discriminating against a group of people simply because they're not fathers doesn't make any sense at all.
So, come up with a law-based answer and more people might be willing to entertain your position. Hell, even legitimate "scientific evidence" would be a welcome change from the hysterical screeches of "It diminishes my marriage to have gay people married" that we keep hearing on the evening news.
Angela Harlem
Jesus Online
FizzingWhizzbees said:
I personally suspect that while some of it is based on homophobia, in actuality a lot of could be more based on a personal view that it is wrong, yet that is then taken to mean it is a belief which the holder shares for ALL. Which is not always the case. Someone can very well make their own opinion why they feel it is wrong, and it doesn't extend to greater society. Kind of like saying "well I dont agree with it, but whatever works for you, good." It doesn't always mean they believe homosexuals should be denied rights etc. Does this make sense? Probably not. If I was of the opinion, 'I don't believe in gay marriage, I think homosexuality is not something I could be comfortable with personally, my opinions are based on religion/societal family values/whatever other reason, BUT these are mine and if anyone feels somehow differently and wants to marry a person of the same gender and do what they feel is right for them that is their choice and I fully support them in how they choose to live their lives'...Is that homophobia? Is it a contradiction? Is it so bad?
I really dont think anyone in here feels they have such a handle on what is right for all that they believe it should be the norm for all. I don't mean to put words in anyone's mouth here, but I don't think some of the personal objections based on a view which seems solely for any individual(s) in here is expressed as a means to encompass all.
/musing
- Status
Similar threads
