Video: Uhm, except I've never used my pillow to clobber a minority's civil rights!
This guy, Robert Rees, apparently hosts a radio talk show in Austin, TX:
Oh so wait: He just reversed the nouns? Ooh, how clever. Really. Quite Inspired.
But here's the thing: No gay marriage activist -- NO. GAY. ACTIVIST. -- is seeking the right to force religious figures to marry gay couples. But most anti-marriage equality activists -- MOST. EVERY. ONE. -- is seeking to use personal faith objections to stop gay and lesbian couples' *CIVIL* marriages. And not just marriages, but also right to fair employment (including military service), the right to keep all recognition of LGBT Americans from children, and the denial of basic protections in a number of other areas. Faith-based objections are not only being injected into bedrooms, but also into public accommodations, legislative chambers, some court opinions, armed forces recruitment centers, immigration offices, and a whole host of places where church separation, minority protections, and the concept of fair and decent citizenship demand more equitable treatment!
No gay person or gay couple or gay family, religious or not, is unfairly foisting his or her or their bedrooms into public life anymore than their heteroSEXUAL counterparts are. But this same comparison cannot be made between anti-LGBT people of faith and pro-LGBT people of faith (who are of course left out of Mr. Rees' religion classification altogether). When talking about civil rights, the burden of proof is on the side that wishes to use varied, personal, ever-changing (and frequently hypocritical) interpretations of morality to deny constitutional fairness, not those who are demanding the latter to be independent from the former (i.e. demanding an accurate read of American freedom).
comments powered by Disqus