Gay Bigotry
2009-11-09 22:55:05 UTC
http://www.tips-q.com/1579533-kelly-boggs-cant-blame-christians-
anymore
Submitted by David Hart on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 15:15
Kelly Boggs of the Baptist Press wants to frame the Maine vote
against marriage equality as a secular result. In setting up
his argument, he first does the proforma demonization of gay
activists:
Homosexual activists have long sought to characterize those who
oppose "gay marriage" as intolerant, homophobic, Bible-thumping
bigots. However, an attempt to depict Maine voters in such
fashion simply will not work.
That is false. Gays really don't care if people support or
oppose the recognition of gay marriage. The issue is one of
imposing personal religious beliefs by force of law. Moreover,
nobody is claiming that the electorate are bigots. Speaking for
myself, the Maine campaign was waged with a dishonest argument
about teaching homosexuality in schools. Aside from the fact
that this would not prospectively be in the curriculum, the
underlying message is that gays are a threat to children. Some
people hear this as "recruitment." Others hear molestation.
Those who would make this argument are, in point of fact,
"intolerant, homophobic, Bible-thumping bigots." Absent any
cogent argument to oppose marriage equality, they manufactured
one based on fear and doubt. It is the same right wing tactic
that got people to support the invasion of Iraq.
Boggs then makes his core argument:
According to a Gallup survey, Maine is the third least religious
state in America. By almost any measure, Maine would be
considered a liberal bastion. But even in the left-leaning,
irreligious Pine Tree State, "homosexual marriage" has been
rejected.
Boggs has selective cognizance. National Organization for
Marriage and Stand for Marriage Maine are Christian
organizations. This crusade was championed by the Roman Catholic
Diocese of Portland. When did that become a secular humanist
institution? I very much "blame the Christians" for the loss of
marriage equality in Maine.
Boggs writes something that I fully agree with:
While I may defend your right to choose, I don't have to like
your choice. I certainly don't have to agree or approve of your
choice. And I don't have to validate or celebrate a choice with
which I disagree.
That statement is at the center of the marriage equality
argument. No one is asking for Boggs' approval of same-sex
unions. Disapproval and stripping civil rights from a minority
group are false equivalences.
Boggs goes on to depict himself as the bigot that he is. Sexual
orientation is not a "lifestyle." Describing sexual orientation
as a "mantra" is intellectually dishonest.
While there are various and perhaps complicated reasons a person
embraces a homosexual lifestyle, the majority of Americans
reject the homosexual mantra.
I would argue that the citizens of Maine made a decision to
retain the status quo, which is really not a decision at all.
The honesty of the arguments to persuade them not to make a
decision were the equivalent of "death panels" in the health
care debate which is also framed by forces who want to retain
the status quo. Scaring people into keeping things as they are
is easy. Empowering people to make an objective decision is far
more difficult.
Look at the queers calling everybody bigots.
Hey queers!
You smell like shit when you walk by. You stink like your
boyfriends' asshole. Bigot that!
anymore
Submitted by David Hart on Mon, 11/09/2009 - 15:15
Kelly Boggs of the Baptist Press wants to frame the Maine vote
against marriage equality as a secular result. In setting up
his argument, he first does the proforma demonization of gay
activists:
Homosexual activists have long sought to characterize those who
oppose "gay marriage" as intolerant, homophobic, Bible-thumping
bigots. However, an attempt to depict Maine voters in such
fashion simply will not work.
That is false. Gays really don't care if people support or
oppose the recognition of gay marriage. The issue is one of
imposing personal religious beliefs by force of law. Moreover,
nobody is claiming that the electorate are bigots. Speaking for
myself, the Maine campaign was waged with a dishonest argument
about teaching homosexuality in schools. Aside from the fact
that this would not prospectively be in the curriculum, the
underlying message is that gays are a threat to children. Some
people hear this as "recruitment." Others hear molestation.
Those who would make this argument are, in point of fact,
"intolerant, homophobic, Bible-thumping bigots." Absent any
cogent argument to oppose marriage equality, they manufactured
one based on fear and doubt. It is the same right wing tactic
that got people to support the invasion of Iraq.
Boggs then makes his core argument:
According to a Gallup survey, Maine is the third least religious
state in America. By almost any measure, Maine would be
considered a liberal bastion. But even in the left-leaning,
irreligious Pine Tree State, "homosexual marriage" has been
rejected.
Boggs has selective cognizance. National Organization for
Marriage and Stand for Marriage Maine are Christian
organizations. This crusade was championed by the Roman Catholic
Diocese of Portland. When did that become a secular humanist
institution? I very much "blame the Christians" for the loss of
marriage equality in Maine.
Boggs writes something that I fully agree with:
While I may defend your right to choose, I don't have to like
your choice. I certainly don't have to agree or approve of your
choice. And I don't have to validate or celebrate a choice with
which I disagree.
That statement is at the center of the marriage equality
argument. No one is asking for Boggs' approval of same-sex
unions. Disapproval and stripping civil rights from a minority
group are false equivalences.
Boggs goes on to depict himself as the bigot that he is. Sexual
orientation is not a "lifestyle." Describing sexual orientation
as a "mantra" is intellectually dishonest.
While there are various and perhaps complicated reasons a person
embraces a homosexual lifestyle, the majority of Americans
reject the homosexual mantra.
I would argue that the citizens of Maine made a decision to
retain the status quo, which is really not a decision at all.
The honesty of the arguments to persuade them not to make a
decision were the equivalent of "death panels" in the health
care debate which is also framed by forces who want to retain
the status quo. Scaring people into keeping things as they are
is easy. Empowering people to make an objective decision is far
more difficult.
Look at the queers calling everybody bigots.
Hey queers!
You smell like shit when you walk by. You stink like your
boyfriends' asshole. Bigot that!