I think this is a touchy subject for all involved. Politically speaking, I think crowing too loudly about it will only hurt the Democratic party. People who consider gay rights a major issue are probably already voting Democrat. But there are a great deal many “southern” type conservative Democrats who this will only further alienate and push away (i.e., Oklahoma is often Democrat on the local level, and Republican on the national level because of things like this). So I think a bold statement like this will result in a net loss of votes not gain.
On the other hand, and I guess this is a different topic, I think the reality is that people would sell their soul and all their beliefs out the window if the presidential candidate tells them he’s going to help their pocketbook out. Too many would let Obama come personally have gay sex with them if he told them he was going to give them some free money back to pay for high gas, and give them “free” health care. Sellout shitbags of the highest order, the lot of ‘em, but I digress…May they be kept free by the diligence of better men than themselves.
Anyway, on the gay marriage issue, I think this is a tough one. Don’t get me wrong - I’m firmly against gay marriage. I believe homosexuality is sinful and wrong, and that those who live that lifestyle will someday answer to God for their choices. But guess what? So will I and everyone else. We all live lives fraught with sinfulness and only by God’s grace are we saved, not our own virtue. People don’t go to hell for being gay, they go to hell because they don’t know Jesus Christ as their Savior. Now…since my views on the homosexuality are based primarily on my religious beliefs, I understand how those who don’t share my belief set aren’t going to buy what I’m selling. From a Christian viewpoint (Missionary Baptist/Southern Baptist background for me) I believe it’s our task to evangelize and witness to all folks, gays included, and when they develop a relationship with the Lord, He will deal with their lifestyle choices (and perhaps He’ll use our example). In the meantime, spreading hate won’t help spread Christianity any more than blowing up the WTC helped to spread Islam. We’re fighting a war of survival with a religion who wants to spread it’s law by the sword, and then try to spread our belief by the legislation? Souls are not won in the halls of Congress. I think that legislating morality by the right is the same helpless plea as legislating safety by the left. Rather than face the real problem – ourselves, our actions, our responsibilities to do right – people want to legislate whatever their problems are out of existence. Sound familiar? A lot like feel-good nonsense of gun control, I think. There are a lot of parallels there. I’m sympathetic to the frustration homosexuals may feel if they are told outright that what they’re doing is wrong and there should be a law against it. As gun owners, we’re told that all the time.
Now on the flipside of that, I may be fairly tolerant of people’s private lifestyle choices, but I do try to go out of my way to not support gay rights issues and their supporters, and be vocal with my beliefs, and my money, when possible. And just as we as gun owners have a duty to be responsible with our guns, I think gay people need to just chill, be gay, and understand that generally, the only time society really lashes out against them, is when it’s shoved in our faces and flaunted. If gun owners got decked out in gear, loaded up a bunch of NFA weaponry, and paraded through the streets shooting our guns in the air, and called it a gun-pride parade, people would treat us like crap, too, and rightfully so. I do not want to see gay rights promoted in schools as “right” or “okay” – that’s for a parent to teach their children, and the children can then make their own choices on the matter as they grow up. A schools responsibility would only be to provide a productive learning environment for everyone regardless of beliefs (beliefs that come from the home and the family, not from the curriculum).
Furthermore, I believe marriage is a religious institution. Not necessarily just Christian, but generally it involves some sort of religious meaning. The government’s recognition of marriage as a legally binding contract is interesting. If gay people want to pair up and legally bind themselves to each other, I may not like it, but I can tolerate it. They have every right to pursue happiness as they see it, so long as it doesn’t interfere with that of others. Maybe that means a “civil union” is acceptable to me. I don’t know what the right answer is. I do have trouble with the idea of preventing these people from seeking happiness in their personal lives. But what I don’t want to see is a governmental blessing of gay marriage. If gays are allowed to form legal contracts equivalent to marriage, there needs to be explicit protection for religious institutions that would refuse to perform or recognize the ceremony.
I think it is, and should be a stalemate – neither side should force their beliefs on the other. I choose a belief system that tells me homosexuality is wrong. Fine, I’ll believe that, and act accordingly so long as I don’t cross into forcing it on others. Gays can choose a belief system where’s is perfectly great – fine, go ahead, just do your thing and don’t force it me either.
