It seems painfully simplistic sometimes to merely point out that, the more educated people are, the more likely they are to support marriage equality, and likewise, that a large part of the reason the Religious Right is still able to inflict their brand of hatred on the democratic process is that they prey on the fears of and outright lie to less educated voters, but sometimes it needs to be pointed out. This map, comparing the votes of North Carolinians on Amendment One with the percentage of college educated voters in each county, says it all quite nicely [click to embiggen, of course]:
Boone said no. :( All NC pupils like what happened today. Many many many of us are disappointed.
NOT* all NC pupils!!!
click to embiggen :) :) that’s adorable.
So the dumber you are, the more uneducated the greater the chance of being a raging bigot? So true.
Sorry, but this really bugs me.
Any time I cast my opponent as less aware, less worthy, less anything, I diminish myself.
As a teenager, my grandpa fought for his path to a college education, got accepted, financed, and still got shot down. Instead, he was a newspaper publisher in his 20s, and ultimately the owner/publisher of another county seat paper for a couple decades. He served a term or two as mayor. He guided others through finding their message and learning how to ask neighbors for their vote.
The maps of NC don’t tell us that areas with fewer bachelor’s degrees are more closed-minded or less intelligent. They tell us that we, as a larger community of LGBT folks and allies, still have our work cut out for us, identifying how best to connect meaningfully with NC folks outside the population centers.
To whatever extent we succeeded and/or failed in that endeavor, it’s our job to figure out why.
Most importantly, it’s our job to figure out how to do better in Minnesota and Maine.
Wow, great comment Bose. I didn’t see it until I read your comment, but this post is very elitist and condescending. I’m sure it was unintentional, but we all need our blind spots pointed out to us.
Little Fancy:
You have spoken enough. No more until next week. Effective immediately.
Wow, you have really thin skin.
Wow. U are banned until 2013. Get lost.
OK!
For the record…
I didn’t read Evan’s words as being elitist or condescending, I wanted to think about how best to learn from the maps to guide future strategy.
AND that is why you don’t put rights to the popular vote…. no exceptions….
Obvious troll is obvious. I pegged the troll for a troll with his silly JC Penney comment on another thread.
I feel like there are some freakonomics at play here. If you plot a map of LGBT population density, you will probably arrive at the same picture (high in RDU, Ashville, Charlotte, zero everywhere else). While these two graphs might mislead you to conclude that LGBT are on average more educated than their heterosexual counterparts, the REAL conclusion is that the probability that a voter supports same-sex anything is directly correlated wit their probability of actually knowing someone who is LGBT. We diminish ourselves when we cast our opponents as “less-educated.” Though they may be, it is likely not the cause of this outcome.
I want to remind people that correlation does not equal causation here. Just because those areas have a higher concentration of educated people does not automatically mean that their educational attainment produced their pro-LGBT attitudes.
The dark green areas of the map overlap with urban areas of North Carolina (Greensboro, Winston-Salem, Charlotte, etc.). Urban areas tend to have more jobs that attract people with degrees, AND they also tend to have more progressive populations. It may just have been that those dark green areas happened to have more educated people AND more progressive people.
DARE County local news is reporting that the vote was AGAINST 51/49%! Please put our county in the ‘red’!
http://news.yahoo.com/video/charlottewcnc-15750615/mecklenburg-1-of-8-counties-to-vote-against-amendment-one-29244441.html
This image is missing Guilford County (UNCG, NC A&T, Bennett College, Greensboro College,Guilford College, HPU and New Hanover County(UNCW.) They both voted against!
Since when does education make one smart? If the democratic process is used and you don’t win you’re just whining. Face it, the marriage amendment passed. ..like it or not, we’re stuck with it. I guess the people this is going to affect should have gotten off their assess and proposed another solution. But they didn’t. If you don’t like the way the people of the area voted and you don’t like what they believe…move. Don’t walk into my living room and try to rearrange my furniture…that’s all NC said.
Tim, since when is it “whining” to object to being attacked like this? This amendment has nothing to do with saying “Don’t walk into my living room and try to rearrange my furniture”. It’s only purpose was to tell us “you’re less than human and we don’t want you in our state”. The “democratic process” was never intended to be able to do that in this country. This country promises equal protection, not mob rule. If you don’t like it, move to Iran.
I disagree. The democratic process is set up like mob rule. Read a book and learn that. NC is my living room, so this exactly like that. You want to force me to accept what I don’t believe, so how does that make you any better, smarter or more right? Marriage was a concept of religion so keep it under the realm of religion. Civil Union is a concept of government and man… so start a movement that make civil unions for gays and marriage for straights. What’s wrong with that? Why should you use the government to make me change my religion? That’s no different from me using the government to protect my religion.
The whole reason for the limits on the democratic process, like not voting on a minority group’s rights, is to avoid mob rule. Read a book that wasn’t written by a historical revisionist and learn that.
No NC is not your living room. It belongs to all of its residents, including the gay ones. How is anyone trying to force you to accept anything? How are you affected by two men going to the court has and getting the legal benefits of a marriage license affect you in any way? But I am better, smarter, and more right because my position is equal rights for everyone. Your position is that a group of people are less than you and therefor shouldn’t have the things you do.
Marriage is a state institution. Religion’s are under no obligation to do anything related to marriage and they are not the ones that provide legal recognition or the associated benefits. Civil unions are a half-assed compromise suggested by bigots who’ve figured out they can’t get away with full denial of rights anymore. The fact that Amendment One bans civil unions as well sheds light on the lie. The simple fact is that if they give the same thing than different names serves no purpose.
How is anyone forcing you to change your religion? How does the ability of a gay couple to get a marriage license have any affect on your religion? How are you “protecting” your religion? Is your faith so weak that forcing others to follow the rules of your religion the only way you can protect it?
Bottom Line is that many Americans are educated and marriage is a word that means the two that join together to produce a result, whether in plumbing marriage or business that result is the goal. You will never see a gay couple produce a child, physically impossible !!!! You do not see many straight male dance choreographers,or hairdressers. We are all different,you cannot make something real that is not by nature right. LGBT have used hate as a weapon and fear . Everyone should have the same civil Rights and the Definition of a straight herterosexual marrige between a man and a woman will always be different from a LGBT union , just because it is what it is. You cannot be a man if born a woman or vice versa. On top of all of that the bottom line is money ,until corporations decide which way they want this to go it will stay as is !!!Hate will never overcome Love and it seems as if the hate that this issue produces coupled with the Opportunistic leaders in the Current administration have made this a campaign issue which they will lose on and Lose big !!!!Obama chose to side with LGBT over money only problem is most straight heterosexuals are angry and mad cause raisng a family is sacrifice and as many straight families struggle they see the elite liberal world party and frolic,Its coming and its gonna be bad forget about marriage think about financial Armageddon all the sign are there we owe 1.25 quadrillion dollars and the Chinese are now running a bank in the USA. Seems like Rome with Obama as NERO on a ridiculous issue!!!!
Name a marriage statute that lists procreation as a requirement Tommy.
Same areas are more urbanized
Same areas have gay “communities”
Same areas have more vegetarian retail
Same areas have more asphalt
Same areas have more air pollution
Same areas have more graduates of institutions dominated by ‘liberalism’
Same areas are dominated by Democrats
Your point is a point only with intent to insult that has no bearing on issue unless you with to move us back to 1780 and restrict voting to those adequately educated.
No Really, the point is that there is a high correlation between bigotry and lacking education. This is hardly the only piece of evidence for that. And if you think it’s insulting to call a spade a spade than it’s no wonder the bigots think they can get away with anything by screaming persecution any time their victims fight back.
Oh goodie, someone decides to rant and rave about the ‘procreation’ issue again – baloney. RainbowPhoenix is 100% correct – try finding ‘must have the ability to have children’ in any marriage certificate, or any marriage law that is currently enforced – you won’t find it. If some numskull tried to push a ‘procreation’ requirement, all the neo-cons currently trying to use it as a bludgeon-stick would immediately do a 180-degree turn and start screaming about government infringing on personal rights – which of course would be incredibly ironic.
And again with the Civil Unions? Yeah, let’s just ignore the fact that the NC Amendment also bans those too – but honestly the only time neo-cons start pushing for CUs is when full Marriage Equality is the goal… it’s just an example of ‘moving the goalposts’. As we’ve seen in Washington state, Hawaii and others, when it’s Civil Unions being debated, the fundie crowd screams and wails JUST as loudly. It’s obvious that these people don’t just oppose Marriage for LGBT Americans – they want ZERO rights for us. They want us shut back into the Closet (with a lock on the door) or pushed into ‘ex-gay’ therapy en masse.
Jeremy Hooper at GoodAsYou has detailed exactly how much true hatred the ‘Yes on One’ campaign had for Gay and Lesbian citizens – and it’s horrifying to see… but it’s recorded for all to see.
Tim said “Marriage was a concept of religion so keep it under the realm of religion. Civil Union is a concept of government and man… so start a movement that make civil unions for gays and marriage for straights. What’s wrong with that?”.
Wrong. Marriage was around long before the first religion. Religion just decided to glom onto it and pretend it was their’s to try and make itself more important. Religion did the same thing with Christmas and Easter – christians were jealous of the mid-winter and spring pagan celebrations so made up stories about Jesus on those dates and pretended it belonged to christianity.
If there’s nothing wrong with civil unions for gays and marriage for heterosexuals why not make it civil unions for heterosexuals and marriage for gays? You’d never agree to that but like the idiot you are you think gays should.
Little Tommy said “Bottom Line is that many Americans are educated and marriage is a word that means the two that join together to produce a result, whether in plumbing marriage or business that result is the goal.”.
Having children has never been necessary to get married so you’re wrong.
Little Tommy said “You will never see a gay couple produce a child, physically impossible !!!!”.
Irrelevant. Just like parents who adopt are parents to a child and they are a family one third of same sex couples have children and they are parents and that is a family. You hypocrites claim marriage is supposed to be about children and yet you want to deny the children of gays the benefits of married parents. You aren’t for childre, you hate children and want to harm them, that’s why you oppose same sex marriage. If you had even one ounce of concern for children you’d be begging the government to allow gay couples to marry. You are a selfish, hypocritical, evil liar.
Tim/Tom,
Legally, marriage does not require procreation, and procreation does not require marriage. But, legally, marriage does benefit children, and many same-sex couples do have children. Ergo, same-sex marriage benefits children. That’s a fact, not an opinion.
If opposite-sex married couples without children benefit from marriage, then same-sex couples without children also benefit from marriage. That’s another fact, not an opinion.
So, if marriage provides tangible benefits for all the families involved, whether or not they have children, why is marriage right for opposite-sex couples, but wrong for same-sex couples?
Is your thinking so rigid and stagnant that anything slightly different than your life-long experience viewed as a threat? Or maybe you just loath gay people, and you feel they are not entitled to the same good things in life as you are. At one time the general attitude towards gay people was uniformly malicious, but nowadays you have the opportunity to be exposed to more enlightened thinking, but when you reject it in favor of clinging to your prejudices, that makes you bigots.
Such hatred from the left. Can’t we all be entitled to an opinion without getting called names. Be respectful of one another. As soon as someone says anything against gay rights, the intollerance of everyone else just comes right on out. Question, should we allow equal rights to all lifestyle choice groups? Like proponents of polygamy, or NAMBLA or people into beastiality? Where do we draw the line. I say where it is now so that our society does not slide any further. Every great nation that has tolerated homosexuality in their society has fallen.
The only hatred is yours James. No one is saying that you can’t have an opinion, but when your opinion is hateful bigotry we have the right to call it out. Why should we respect you when you disrespect us on such a fundamental level that you think the law should treat us as legal inferiors? It’s not “intolerance” to retaliate against bigotry. Question; what does polygamy have to do with gay people? What does NAMBLA have to do with gay people? What does bestiality have to do with gay people? You can’t argue on your position’s own merits so you try to link us with all manner of disgusting things, then cry persecution when we call you out on how insulting that is. I draw the line at informed consent and legal consistancy. Your inability to understand the former makes me fear for the safety of your wife. It is a bald-faced lie that nations who treat their gay citizens equally fall. Rome only fell after christianity came to power and started doing things like persecuting gays. As always, you bigots have only yourselves to blame for the things you try to lay at our feet.
Like I said. Name calling for having an opinion. I am in no way linking you to those other groups I mentioned. All I’m saying is that there are fringe elements that support that stuff. Do we also allow a man or woman to have multiple spouses? If not, why not. It is something they believe in and do not get equal rights.
Plus this chart is misleading. See comment 25. College degree doesn’t imply acceptance of homosexuality. Most post secondary institutions are so leaning to the left they almost fall over.
No it’s having your bigotry pointed out. When your opinion is that a group of people need to be treated as legal inferiors, you don’t get to cry and scream persecution when the people you work to disadvantage fight back. You are the aggresor. That means you are not and can not be the victim no matter how much you whine otherwise. Furthermore, trying to claim that those things will happen if we get equal rights is an attempt to link us to those groups. The only reason you do that is because you know you can’t argue your position on its own merits. So you link us to all sorts of horrible things to hide that fact. That is bigoted. You are not being attacked for having an opinion. You are facing retaliation for your desire to hurt people.
I am not the agressor you are look at how hateful you are You are over the top. All I can say is wow.
Which side is it that is working to hurt people? Oh right, yours. This isn’t aggression. This is retaliation. This isn’t hate. This is fighting back against hate. You set out to hurt people. You are not and can never be the victim as long as you continue to do so. You are a bigot and a bully, and like every other bigot and bully in the world you think you have a blanket right to hurt people and that you are somehow being wronged because your victims are fighting back. That’s not how it works.
Btw, I don’t have to argue my position because the voters already did
You have a very clouded perception of reality.
The voters don’t determine people’s rights. This is as temporary as your attempts to preserve slavery, women as property, and bans on interracial marriage.
The voters just did. 32 states now and growing That stuff happened before I was even born so I don’t have any connection with that. Good luck to you and keep calling people bigots and bullies and see how far that gets you. Once you start name calling, people start to shut down and won’t listen to your argument no matter how good it might be.
And all those laws will be struck down for the simple reason that they exist only to hurt a group of people. You are the type of person who would have screamed that your rights were being violated by abolition. You would have screamed about how your rights were being violated because you weren’t allowed to beat and rape your wife anymore. You would have screamed about how your rights were being violated because people were being allowed to muddy the races. You are using the exact some arguments and the exact same victim-playing that were being used then. Good look with your continued attempts to play the victim even as you try to hurt people and see how far that gets you. The more you scream that certain people need to be treated as moral inferiors because to do otherwise infringes on your right to hurt them, the more people see your bigotry and bullying for what it is and stop listening to your excuses.
Incessant rambling. Good luck.
Coward’s deflection. Good luck.
Peace people… Peace!
I would like to ask a couple of simple questions.. Of James I think… Others perhaps…
1) What will be the harm in two men or two women sharing a commitment together that society (religious and otherwise) has termed marriage?
2) Is “Marriage” a civil contract?
2a) If so are not all people over the age of majority entitled to enter into such a contract?
3) Is “Marriage” a religious institution?
3a) If so, is not the government, inclusive of votes by the populace, required to maintain separation of an from the “Church” – In which case no legislation related to religious institutions is allowable. It follows that “Marriage” is not definable by the state, as such anyone can get “Married”
Please people, put on your critical thinking caps…. and think this through.
Bob,
Thank you for rising above and being respectful. We can all have adult conversation while being respectful.
To answer your questions: for me it is easy. The bottom line for me is that I am a Christian and believe that the bible is the word of God. I understand your point of view but it goes against my beliefs. That’s it.
As far as separation of church and state goes, The whole reason that existed is to get away from the church of England’s influence on our society. And that is the only reason. That does not mean that religion should not be in our government at all. Our country was founded on Judeo- Christian beliefs and morals and as such, religion is one of the biggest contributors to our culture along with nationality and geography. Culture changes over time and I get that and this diaspora of the LBGT community is having a huge impact on that. It is my opinion however, that religion still plays a huge role in our culture today. If the law changes, I will go along with it even though I don’t agree because it is the law. I will always be respectful and recognize your right to be the way you are. The only thing I ask is that you also respect my right to be a Christian and give my opinion as well. Let us be respectful of one another with peaceful debates and allow democratic process to run its course. Thanks again for rising above.
James,
Thank you for your polite comments…
I still await answers to those questions. I have asked the same questions for years… I’ve never, not once had anyone from your side of the issue be willing to attempt to resolve the conundrum. The answer though you are reluctant to admit it is found in the simple truth: You live your life, I’ll live mine. I’ll marry who I wish and so will you. Your rights to worship how you will, assemble, bear arms, a free press etc. will still be preserved and your marriage will last or not on it’s merits, exactly as it does now; Not dependent on my same sex spouse, the children we adopt (gentle jab), where we marry or whether or not it’s in a church.
The truth of the matter is that you and those who believe as you do simply “feel” that same sex marriage is wrong due to the education you have been subjected to. You have no empirical evidence that supports your position and have no place to take the debate other than “faith”. While I respect your faith, you and those who share your beliefs have not the right to impose them on me or anyone else. I refuse to sit on the sidelines and will argue my point to the end of my days. Perhaps you and I can request an audience with the almighty and ask him to clarify.
There will come a time when we all look back on this issue with the same disgust as we do slavery, child labor, racism, religious discrimination etc.
Know sir, that it will happen within your lifetime, if for no other reason than the love I feel carries the same weight as the love you feel.
I remain, fully prepared to engage in a respectful, considerate public debate of this issue and invite all comers to the challenge. I am prepared with a venue and an audience of (believe it or not) in excess of 65% republicans. I will sell tickets and donate the proceeds to a local arts organization.
No one has had the courage to accept the challenge in ten years. I tire of my freedoms being impinged by your belief system.
A little bit of history…
I was gay before it was cool…
Today we look back at the distance that our country has come… all the civil rights debates that took years to resolve… It will take a while yet, we still have to change the minds of those with their heads stuck in the sand; hell we’ve still got opposition from people who believe it’s a choice. Ours is not the only human rights challenge either… consider the intellectually disabled…and the vast collection of rights they are denied.
Years ago I asked a friend and mentor of mine “why is all this marriage stuff so important?” I was so young, so naive and he said “because the love I feel is no different than the love anyone else feels” I was about twenty at the time… not out to many people, very afraid. Two years later he died, they say.. of opportunistic infections that were possible because he had AIDS. It was in the early days of the infection, just after they determined how it was spread. I remember because I was there.
His family had ejected him, his faith community abandoned him, the medical community defeated him, the government ignored him, he had not felt the simple joy of being touched for six months. The hospital wouldn’t let anyone other than family in to see him as he lay dying. His partner of three years called them, but they didn’t come. The hospital was so involved in saving his life that they wouldn’t let him live what little he had left.
He lay there, afraid, in pain, exhausted – tired of the fight. He tried to smile for me, he tried so hard…. As he smiled, ever so slightly his lips which were so dry and chapped cracked and bled. I don’t think I ever tried so hard to not let anyone see me cry, before or since.
His name was David… He died alone, profoundly alone and so afraid.
I know now… why all this Marriage stuff is important.
“Because the love I feel is no different than the love anyone else feels”
I will argue this point at every opportunity, every place, under every circumstance until you… who share the same ignorance as his family, his church, his doctor, even the woman who gave birth to him are willing to see the David’s all around you, and grant them the same recognition that David’s parents had.
Bob, I plan to answer you when I get some time. New work week and all.
Bob,
It took me a little while but here are responses to your previous posts.
As a geneticist, I found the arguments you make to be intriguing, but faulty. First and foremost, the very foundation of the homosexual movement’s argument is based on the belief that homosexuality is an inborn trait. The reality is that there is no empirical scientific evidence to support the claim. Though studies have been conducted that claim so, which had been widely reported in the national media, the reality is that none of the studies presented in the journals have withstood scientific and intellectual rigor. In other words, the studies’ results were un-reproducible and therefore were dismissed by the scientific community in the normal process of research and examination. In fact, when faithfully examined against evolutionary science, biological science, anatomy, and other disciplines of biological science, there is no support genetically, evolutionarily, or anatomically for the instance of homosexuality as a biologically valid genotype or phenotype. Looking beyond genetic and biological support, I had lunch this week with a noted Ph.D. Neuroscientist friend of mine. In case you friend believe that I am trying to stack the deck against your argument with faith-based researchers; my friend is a confessed atheist. As he is most current in neurological studies, he too confirmed what I have observed and studied within the scientific literature: there is no biological root cause for homosexuality. In fact, our conversation almost immediately turned to what we believe is a frightening trend in empirical science – a widespread lack of empirical and intellectual rigor coupled with intense political pressure by the LGBT lobby to suppress freedom within the scientific community. I have experienced this as has my friend – threats both covert and overt to careers if a particular theoretical line is pursued. I understand that the LGBT community believes it has been suppressed in its freedom, but I can say as an eye-witness who did his postgraduate work in perhaps the most LGBT accepting city on the planet – the San Francisco Bay area – that they have done the very same thing. Indeed, to discuss any other scientific possibility to the origins of homosexual behavior outside of the inborn trait theory is to open oneself to bullying, labeling, and threat. Apparently, intellectual freedom is only for those who agree with the political forces at work. Like this ill-advised chart on this site implies that only dumb people don’t embrace your lifestyle. Quite disturbing. I have multiple degrees in various fields of work. I just didn’t let the liberal institutions undermine my moral fiber.
A second point to share with you. Since there is no biological evidence for inborn homosexuality, the issue falls into the realm of psycho-social behavioral science. In other words, without a biological origin, either homosexuality is a psychological condition or (and) it is a belief system (worldview). You suggest that your “feelings” are involved in your expression of homosexual behavior. We agree. Feelings or emotions (affect) are a matter for behavioral science, and thus fall into the realms of Psychology, Philosophy, and Theology. It is interesting to note that when the APA (American Psychological Association) agreed some years back that homosexuality be removed as a psycho-sexual abnormality, it was not by absolute consensus. In fact, a great many very studied and respected psychologists disagreed at a ratio of about 60%-40%, if I recall correctly. Because of this, I contacted several friends in the counselor community to get a read on the contemporary undercurrent concerning the nature of homosexuality as either normal behavioral variant or an abnormality. As I suspected, many believe that homosexuality is a psychological condition with sexual-behavioral manifestations, while others do not. This means there is still no consensus among providers. What I also discovered, like the biological sciences, there is a strong and determined lobby to suppress a pursuit of research that would oppose the views of the LGBT political forces. In fact, you may have seen a recent movement where politicians California are working hard to squash behavioral science practitioners from working with homosexuals who wish to overcome the behavior. Contrary to what the LGBT community might say, no one is forced into counseling for the correction of homosexual behavior, they chose to go. The bottom line is that if homosexuality is a feeling, then it is a matter for behavioral science or social science, and therefore should be open to the same interpretations and scientific evaluation as any other behavior, with its ebbs and flows as evidence is collected, confirmed and/or refuted. Needless to say, I personally don’t believe the LGBT community will ever allow this.
In fact, I believe that homosexuality is as much a belief system as it is a psych-social condition. Take for example the lack of scientific evidence to support the belief that one is born homosexual. Despite evidence to the contrary, members of the LGBT community hold rigidly to the belief. Thus, it is not biology, but philosophy and perhaps theology. As such, the LGBT is at par with all other belief systems, including religious faith groups and has no more or less right to believe as they do. Yet, without question, the LGBT community wants to label all belief systems counter to it as “hate groups,” ensuring that its dogmatic viewpoint dominates over all others. I ask the simple question, is this intellectual freedom?
Thirdly, on the issue of homosexual marriage, it appears that you have failed to account for the culture origins of marriage within the heterosexual community. Even a brief study of marriage as a cultural expression proves that it has been exclusively a heterosexual activity across cultures and throughout the history of humankind. You suggest you have a “right” to marry based again, on your “feelings.” If you suggest that your feelings are the basis for a right, then you have failed to make your case. In fact, you make no case for where the right originates. Quite the contrary, ignoring all other evidence and simply based on the cultural evidence at hand, the heterosexual community has a greater right to an exclusive claim to marriage. As I try to make sense of his argument, at the very least, the homosexual community refuses to even acknowledge the long history and caretaking of marriage (with all its trials and troubles) through the vast expanse of history, Rather, in typical American arrogance, they use the blunt force of individual rights (and as I witnessed in San Francisco – the liberal use of violence) to force an a world-wide social group linked by millennia of history and cultural unity to submit to their will. We Americans have a strong history of this kind of usurpation, as do some other cultures. Take for example the American domination of the Native American culture. For millennia, the Native American’s held the land they lived on – cared for it, exploited it, enjoyed it, died defending it. Then the Americans came, who self-proclaim manifest destiny, told the Natives to surrender their claim to land, either move or die, and then took the land. They did this not just by force – they made it legal in the laws enacted by the congress so as to give legitimacy to their actions. The LGBT community, in my opinion, is doing the very same thing to the heterosexual community. Marriage has been our institution. We created it, cared for it, bled for it, grieved within it. By blunt force, homosexual activists are trying to claim a cultural institution as their own, without so much as a word of appreciation to the heterosexual community, via the blunt force of hate speech and while changing the law to give their insensitivity and abruptness legitimacy. My question for your friend is, if the US provides so much freedom, why do you need to take marriage away from heterosexuals as their unique institution. Why can’t heterosexuals keep marriage as their own institution? Why won’t you use your freedom to create your own institution? Nothing prevents this, and if economics is the ultimate goal of usurping the marriage institution, why not legislate an equivalent so that you have something that bespeaks your uniqueness while allowing us to preserve our own institutions? Does your claim to individual rights have any real legitimacy over the rights of a group with millennial consistency and history? If so, why?
The answer to the final question is how does Theology, or in my case the Christian text, fit in to all of this. First, I read the passages of the Hebrew and Greek texts myself. While neither set of texts were, in my opinion, ever intended to be a modern science book, I believe these texts match the scientific evidence concerning homosexuality. From the empirical evidence available through solid science, the texts match the view that homosexuality is a behavior outside the biological, psycho-spiritual, and behavioral norms of culture. Science cannot prove faith and vice versa, but they can show congruence and incongruence. In this case, Christian scripture is congruent with a secular, unbiased scientific view that homosexuality stands outside the norm of human behavior.
Another thing I would like to say is that both you and Rainbow Phoenix have talked about legislating morality into our culture. Do you not agree that it is immoral to murder someone or to rape someone and the list goes on? If so, don’t we legislate these morals by saying in our laws that it is illegal to do so and we hold people accountable? Do we change our laws because people may feel a different way? Again, I take you back to one of my previous posts when I asked the question about where do we draw the line? When do we stop changing laws based on “feelings”? Did you know that the bible also says that it is wrong to murder? Bible=Truth There are many examples but this is already too long.
Lastly, I would be remiss not to defend my faith. Christianity does not discriminate and is accepting of everyone. We are not bigots or any of the other vial names that Rainbow Phoenix likes to spout off. We are ALL sinners and born that way. It is human nature to be a sinner. The good news is that Jesus has interceded for us and has taken the burden of that sin. All can come to know Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior including homosexuals. However, according to Christian Theology it is a sin to engage in homosexual activity. If you confess that sin, you will be forgiven.
The last thing I will say, I promise is that liberals do something what I like to call “creeping incrementalism”. Liberals erode something like the constitution or morals a limitless bit so that most people don’t notice until it becomes the norm. Then they will keep eroding more all the time. Like the legislation of what doctor I can use, or what light bulb to use or what wood to use for guitars. These are all constitutional rights as I have already addressed the moral issue at length. How about my right to protest around the president. Can’t do that anymore or you can be arrested for a felony offense. We are never going to agree so we can agree to disagree. I do agree with you on one thing though in that we will see gay marriage in this country in our life time. My side has lost the issue. However, There will be ultimate victory for my side when Jesus returns. I hope and pray you are on the right side then.