Tolerance. Acceptance.
The United States is supposed to be a country of tolerance... but is it really?
Of course not. Not entirely. You might think that it is de jure (by law)... but whether you look at it de facto (by fact) or de jure, the United States is not entirely tolerant.
Today is the Day of Silence, according to Gay Rights Activists. Coming from Conservative Orange County in Southern California, I've heard a lot of people talk down to the individuals who have chosen to participate in donning black and keeping silent today. What are you doing? What's the point? Marriage should be between a man and a woman, that's what it says in the Bible!!
I should really include a disclaimer here. I'm not a "flaming liberal," nor am I full of "right wing crap." I choose my position on issues based on what I believe to be right based on the laws and basic philosophies that are in the Constitution. The Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution with philosopher John Locke's theory of natural rights in mind, the natural rights of life, liberty, and property (Jefferson later changed that to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for the purpose of the Declaration of Independence but that's another story).
How can you tell me that there's tolerance and acceptance in this country when an entire sect of society is without rights guaranteed by the Constitution?! That idea is simply ludicrous to me. Thomas Jefferson called for a "wall of separation" between church and state. Whoever said that church mandated definitions for marriage had to apply to the government? The government should make its own definitions. While some people may not agree with, advocate, or choose homosexuality for themselves, it is not for them to push their values and principles on others. That would be the rights of the majority taking over the rights of the minority - a fear that the Founding Fathers expressed in their writings, The Federalist Papers.
Sexuality is not a choice. You can't force yourself to be someone you aren't. And even for all the religious individuals out there, if you have a homosexual tendency and attempt to suppress that desire in order to stay with your faith, are you not in some way lying to God? And if you do subscribe to religious beliefs, wouldn't you agree that God created the world and everything in it for a reason?
Think it over. Do what's right and not what people stuff down your throat.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
I wholeheartedly agree. It makes me sick that we claim to be a country of liberty and freedom and then treat such a significant part of the population as second-class citizens.
Sorry, I have to disagree. First, if you are going to quote the bible, you really should read all of it. The book of Genisis tells of God creating man & woman, and the first marriage. The book of Romans shows God's displeasure with homosexuality(because its not natural) Please know, God hates homosexuality, but not homosexuals.
Now, as far as your argument for separation of church, its bogus. The founding fathers knew that when you had the church or government running each other you were going to have trouble. But, they also knew that government with out a moral compass, was also doomed to failure. The first amendment is the most misquoted amendment in the constitution. You would be surprised how many of the founding fathers would agree with this view.
Peter18
I believe that sexual orientation is inborn and unchangeable, as do many, and I refuse to accept that a loving God would shape and form one of his children to feel a certain way and then condemn them for it. My God isn't a hypocrite.
I just don't buy that sexual orientation is inborn. Partly because I grew up a 'partier'. Constantly bombarded by gorgeous girls and partaking plenty my apetites spread untill I was fantasizing about men.
I'm a horrible christian. But I am one.
That's just how I see that little aspect of the debate
The Bible was written by man... not God. Therefore, it's riddled with man's interpretation of what God wants. You can make the argument that God guided man to write the Bible, but nevertheless, it was written by man. It is imperfect, as man is. God can love everyone and hate the things they do. It's the equivalent of saying to a child throwing a temper tantrum, "I hate your attitude right now, but I still love you." But, just because God hates homosexuality, Christians should not feel that as license to target homosexuals with hate crimes or deny them rights that everyone else has. You may keep them out of your church since that is your belief, but to keep them from having the same basic rights that you have is not right and unchristian - what of the "love thy neighbor as thyself"?
For the comment about the separation of church and state, I have this reply. The Founding Fathers were educated men. They were not country bumpkins and they had all studied philosophy. A society must have rules and regulations to preserve the rights of all those living within the society. Following Montesquieu, the citizens must give up some basic freedoms in order to gain their freedoms back. As you said, there needs to be a moral compass in society so that society does not fall into chaos. The Founding Fathers based this on basic Christian morals of the time because they were accessible and widely accepted. You can note that several of the Founding Fathers openly did not believe in an active God. Men like Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin were deists: they believed that God created the universe and then stepped back from having an active part in it.
All morals derive from universal and absolute truths that form the basis for religion. And what is religion? Religion is man's device to keep himself "civil" - not killing his neighbor and not destroying himself and society. For the agnostics and atheists out there, religion is just man's justification to keep him doing good things and thus prevent man committing crimes on other men.
I present these views as what I believe to be fair and true, based on my own set of values that I have formed living my own individual life. I do not impose my values or principles on others and I expect others not to impose theirs on mine. My whole point in this blog is to point out that while Christians may hold their beliefs about homosexuality, it is not their place to impose these beliefs onto others. You don't go to heaven based on how many people you convert or how many people you save from sin... When Martin Luther broke from the Catholic church, he founded the Protestant sect of Christianity with the idea of salvation through faith alone. If that is true, then why do Christians feel it absolutely necessary to convert everyone they see with pamphlets and sometimes even threats that that individual will burn in hell. Nobody ever likes to be told they're wrong, and shoving beliefs down people's throats is not the way to get them to join your beliefs. Perhaps with a little more tolerance and welcoming atmosphere, Christians would find more followers in their faith.
Of course, there are many Christian churches that do just that. At a good church, you will want to go there everyday and enjoy a relationship with God, everyday... not just on Sundays when you feel obligated to go.
I don't expect to change any of your thoughts, this is simply my reply and perhaps a little more explanation of how I formed my own opinions.
Amen. Rights should be guaranteed to everyone. Just because a person doesn't like the idea of gay marriage doesn't mean they should infringe on the rights of another person. Most likely, those people also don't believe in divorce. But that's legal.
It's like, a man and a woman making out in public is gross. It's just as gross to see two members of the same sex having too much PDA.
Also, if they are in a stable relationship, what's the big deal?
And, as you already mentioned, the bible was written by men.