The idea was that if we all just went along with the very fair idea that gay people could get married, there would be the standard American respect for conscience, and no one would be made to do something against their religious beliefs. Doubting that advocates were sincere in this assertion was considered a bigotry in itself.
Well, Round One. I get it that this is different. This is a for-profit wedding chapel service, those outfits that once only existed in Nevada, but now seem to be in other tourist burgs as well. I can see the logic that if you've got a roadside wedding chapel, like a drive-through restaurant, it is something like a public accommodation. Not the same thing as threatening to put Father O'Malley in jail.
I just don't believe it will stop there.
I believe that most LGBT and LGBT-friendly folks meant it when they made their promises over the last 10 years. I think they meant it when they said they weren't interested in forcing their beliefs on others. I also think that most of them don't support the idea now.
I also believe they will not do one damn thing to stop it. They will look the other way, and have so much of their time taken up with fighting homophobia that they will have no time for rights of conscience.
I take that back. Andrew Sullivan and some others have been logically and morally consistent at times, and deserve some credit for it. There will be a few. It won't change anything, but there will be a few.
Objecting is "homophobic" and subject to discipline. Hearing no objections, new motions pass unanimously.
ReplyDeleteFingers of a one-handed person few.
ReplyDeleteThere is also the problem of criterion. If two gays, why not relatives, polyamorists etc?
ReplyDeleteAlso, I many really want to force their beliefs on others. Like Bill Maher said, there is a gay mafia and you will get whacked.
There is also the issue of complete lack of concern for other groups that are discriminated against. A woman in a lesbian marriage that I work with to whom I have painstakingly tried to explain the gross injustice of her running programs that completely exclude the disabled. She just smiles in a ditzey way, obviously doesn't give a !@#$, and does nothing to make the programs more inclusive. If I had drawn her attention to the fact that she wasn't allowing black children in, she would have had the wit to fix the situation. But, as I tiresome rant, those with developmental disorders and the mentally ill are the last group that people feel just fine discriminating against, trashing verbally, etc. Even groups who have so recently been discriminated against themselves that you'd think they'd be more sensitive....
ReplyDeleteEven house slaves feel a superiority complex when looking at the field hands.
ReplyDeleteThere's always a hierarchy to the shat, since humans are born to live in social hierarchies and superior-inferior relationships. There can be no fairness, except between equally virtuous individuals. And you won't find those on slave farms.
The homo profiteers and gaystapo will not bother Islam, for a single reason. They think they will hijack Islam after they hijack and get rid of the Christians.
Heh.
The idea was that if we all just went along with the very fair idea that gay people could get married, there would be the standard American respect for conscience, and no one would be made to do something against their religious beliefs.
Hah, that's pretty funny. What's the next one.
Retriever - that has long been my complaint against black and hispanic groups, especially. They are only for themselves. the other liberals groups - general feminist, peace, environmental, tend to make an effort to include others in the coalition. I may disagree with them, but I can respect that.
ReplyDelete