NOM versus tolerance
In a 2013 CNN appearance, megapastor Rick Warren—who, I should remind you, has directly compared homosexuality to incest or pedophilia, has likened the gay "struggle" to anger or having multiple sexual partners, and has bizarrely mentioned both arsenic and punching a guy in the nose in the same breath as same-sex marriage—accused LGBT activists of engaging in some sort of Orwellian doublespeak when we talk about tolerance for LGBT. Today, that quip becomes the latest basis for an increasingly desperate special interest group's new meme:
Right, NOM. Like discriminating against certain kinds of taxpayers because of your personally-held theology, for instance. That's certainly not equally valid to the idea that all religious beliefs, including anti-LGBT ones, can be tolerated and accommodated, so long as they don't encroach into the public sector and stifle other people's civil rights (i.e. the idea that drives the LGBT movement).
The problem, of course, is that groups like NOM and voices like Warren pretend that this notion of equal civil rights is a negotiation in which we just have some sort of disagreement. Um, in a word: no. We are not asking for our rights. We are not requesting their faith-driven permission. We are going to keep pushing until we get exactly what we deserve. And once we achieve that goal, the NOMs and Warrens of the world will be shocked to learn how little we care about their opinions. We will absolutely tolerate their opinions, their expression, and their general engagement because we will have no reason not to. The only reason why we care—THE. ONLY. REASON.—is because they believe they are entitled to religious-guided overreaches. They are just plain wrong—and we don't have to tolerate their bad information.
comments powered by Disqus