RECENT  POSTS:  » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/30/2012

Administering wrong-headed religious tests, unwilling to be receptive student

by Jeremy Hooper

Here is an example of the flawed arguments that permeate (define?) the "protect marriage" movement. This one was found on Protect Marriage Maine's Facebook wall:

201208300924

A couple of things.

(1) Marriage vows are not required to be read in public in a way that invokes God. However, a civil marriage license (i.e. what the marriage equality movement is seeking) is required of any couple of any religious view that wishes to have state/federal recognition. This is not up for debate. This is fact.

(2) If you feel so strongly about adultery, then push for laws that inscribe these religious beliefs into wall. Expressly ban this kind of behavior, if that is your goal. Create multi-million dollar campaigns built around this matter. Write Biblical condemnations of adultery into law, if you think you can muster public support for that one. But the fact of the matter is this is not happening AT ALL while billions have been spent over the past decade for the sole purpose of stopping or eliminating civil marriage rights for same-sex couples.


If the other side wants to help us build a stronger coalition of fairness-minded, church/state-separated citizens, then they can keep on with this religious insistence. Please. I beg them to. The truth: it is an untenable, aggressively misrepresentative holdout that will ultimately bring full equality to all fifty states.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails