A message to anyone who doesn't support gay marriage.

[Kurska]

I'm not mincing words here. I'm 21 and my generation will be the grave diggers for all your bigotry and hate. Enjoy your probable victory in North Carolina, but remember when you are dead the disgusting prejudice that you disguise as faith dies with you.

Savor your last few years of relevance, because you'll spend eternity spinning in your grave.

[gateley]

1. You should post this on the WRAL site. I doubt many here are not supporting gay marriage. nt

[Kurska]

3. I think you would be surprised.

Very very surprised.

Not that I expect the rats to post in this thread.

[gateley]

5. You're right -- I'd be very surprised, and undoubtedly very saddened. nt

[cali]

25. yep. I'd be very surprised, dear.

[DRoseDARs]

39. This comes up on DU every election cycle. After initial shock, I ceased being surprised in 2004. nt

[awoke_in_2003]

30. oh, there were plenty on the other day...

who claimed Biden lost us the independent and moderate vote. I won't do a callout, but I did suggest we didn't need bigots on our side.

[gateley]

61. On the other hand, he may have garnered some pro-gay marriage voters who aren't

thrilled by either Obama or Romney. Who knows? The shame of it is that it's become a political tool -- peoples' rights are viewed as potential support. I hate that it's like this, but that's the reality of it. They may have been right about the effects of Biden's statement. That's the ugly side of politics.

I'm glad Joe spoke his heart, though.

ETA -- that's part of the reason I supported Biden at the beginning (when he was running for POTUS) -- I knew he'd level with us and wouldn't hide behind political talk. He's always been like that. People criticized him for it, but I admired it -- he treated us all like adults and told us the truth.

[dbackjon]

101. Then you would be wrong

Many here don't support it.

Many here claim they DO support it, but really want the pro-gay mariage people to shut the fuck up about it, at least until there is not an election of any kind coming up in the next, say, five years.

[HereSince1628]

2. Why not send a letter to a newspaper in North Carolina?

You're preaching to the choir here.


http://www.heraldsun.com/letter_submit

[AlbertCat]

106. You're preaching to the choir here.

Speaking of preaching....

Post it in the "Religion" forum.

The opposition to Gay Marriage is all religious, all the time. There are no reasons except religious ones to oppose it.

[HereSince1628]

109. Maybe, although I think not on DU.

The energy it takes to post here is about the same as the energy required to post at a newspaper in a place where it would make a difference.
But the impact here is next to zero because almost everyone here is for marriage equality.

[froster]

169. If they had posted it in Religion forum...

... they would be banned from DU by now. (Just happened to a couple folks over there for saying little more than the OP.)

[quinnox]

4. why post this here

and your tone is very off putting to say the least.

[Kurska]

6. We should all be furious

I hope it is offputting. I'm pretty fucking "Offput" myself that an entire state of gay people might be denied basic rights like hospital visitation by this law.

[quinnox]

8. whatever, so you decided to post an angry rant against duers

we aren't the enemy.

[Kurska]

9. Any Duer that doesn't support gay marriage is my enemy.

I'm not sorry for that, this is a make of break issue for me. You can not be a progressive and support treating gays like second class citizens.

[quinnox]

11. I love how you think your generation is full of enlightenment

give me a break, I promise your generation will have plenty of republican assholes just like any other, and they won't agree with you. Do you think everyone your age is some kind of progressive, because its not true.

[Kurska]

13. My generation is overwhelmingly infavor of it, but I have even more respect for older folks on the

the right side of the issue. It takes even more courage and conviction to support something that isn't as popular among your peers.

My message is exclusively for people who don't support gay marriage.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

23. "My generation is overwhelmingly infavor of it"

I disagree. There are a lot of young people, especially minorities, who have too much "old school" in them.

Fortunately, most of the ones against it don't seem to care enough to vote, so we may have that going for us.

[Kurska]

29. Please reference this

Support for legal gay marriage decreases markedly with age, ranging from 70% support among those aged 18 to 34

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx

[Dawgs]

76. Young people in the sixties were overwhelmingly against war, then they grew up and voted GOP.

Most people are willfully ignorant and uninformed. That will never change.

[WinniSkipper]

131. But the bigger picture is more important

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 08:18 PM - Edit history (1)

And that is - opposition to marriage equality is declining across all demographics. Not fast enough - but it is declining.

Even Catholics (according to Pew) support it in the majority http://www.people-press.org/2012/04/25/more-support-for-gun-rights-gay-marriage-than-in-2008-or-2004/4-25-12-7/

One thing you will find as you grow older - people tend to get more conservative. Yes your generation is leading the way. It should. That's what your generation is supposed to do. We did it, now you do it. But wait till your generation is ours - you will run into the same issues we do. The goal is to have more of your generation hang on to Democratic principals. And then your task in 20 years will be the same as ours is today.

[froster]

172. Right... don't argue with Baby Boomers.

They've done it all. It's all about the BBers, for the BBers. Even my parents, both War Babies, see it.

Don't bother trying to change the world, whipper snapper. Didn't you hear? The Baby Boomers already tried that, and if they couldn't do it, nobody can.

Talk about arrogant.

[WinniSkipper]

185. Not arrogant at all

just facts. And we haven't done it all or else the young wouldn't be in the position they are in. Our generation has failed in many ways

It's passing the torch. We are older. We probably do more of our support though money than time (in general, not DU). We have friends who we wore tie dyes with in college, smoked A LOT of pot with, and who are now anti-MMJ. We protested AIDS, and some of the people at our side then could't give a crap about gay rights now.

We are asking for help, from the next generation that will carry our ideals.

And when you have your MLK, your JFK and RFK, your Kent States, your Chicago 7, maybe you will understand a bit more.

[pintobean]

200. That's all well and good

but when I hear anti-gay bigoted slurs slung around, it's almost always from your generation. My generation mostly grew out of that shit. I hope yours does too.

[Hippo_Tron]

191. Statistically speaking, we're more in favor of it than other age groups

Of course no group if monolithic and there are certainly young people who are not in favor of gay marriage, just as there are old people who are.

Additionally, it would help if we'd show up to vote. And numbers on some other social issues (namely a woman's right to choose) isn't quite as progressive as one would think.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

192. As I said, the good news is the ones against it don't vote

Or they don't follow it close enough. They'll likely wake up one day outraged.

[musical_soul]

53. While more younger people are for it.....

there are still a great many who aren't.

Just heard today about how some of the local kids were reacting to it in the schools. To say the least, some of it was truly bigoted toward gays. I'm not saying you hate gays if you're for the amendment. However, if you say stuff like "Fuck the gays, they can go to hell," then that's hatred. I do love rural schools. Sigh.

[Rozlee]

78. My parents were born in the late 1900s

and were Mexican illegals to boot. A demographic you'd think would be absolutely anti-gay. And you'd be right. But, when my nephew came out and my jerk of a brother threw a fit and disowned him, my parents, shocked that he'd reject his own son, defiantly let him come live with them. My mother even invited his partner to dinner, even though my Dad hid in his room for that one. But, sometimes, knowing a person who's gay or having a gay member in your family tones down bigotry. My brother made his peace with my nephew and even fixed the plumbing in his partner's mother's house for free once. Acceptance is slow and they'll always be those who absolutely will never accept.

[OriginalGeek]

14. I agree. We should be more angry.

Silence ain't gonna get shit done.

My little brother called this morning because he was upset he couldn't vote against this awful discrimination. It was his fault - he wasn't registered to vote because he didn't know he had to be (He had moved since the last time he voted in any election).

But I bet some loud screaming and yelling and anger in his neighborhood might have led him to the information he needed. He will be prepared for November but he's going to bed angry and upset tonight.

Yes, there are a LOT of issues that need to be yelled and screamed about but just because there are a lot of things that need attention doesn't mean you slack off on one of them.

Civil rights are pretty fucking important. The time for politeness is fucking over.

[Kurska]

16. Absolutely.

This is our country built on the foundation of liberty and equality. We need to start getting furious when someone tries to pervert that and discriminate against vulnerable groups.

[awoke_in_2003]

31. +1. nt

[froster]

173. Hell yeah! Right there with ya, friend. nt

[maddezmom]

89. it wasn't directed at DU'ers it was a righteous rant directed at bigots

that don't support equal rights. Not sure why your upset about hurting their feelings.

[dbackjon]

102. Really?

Many here on DU do not support gay rights.

[musical_soul]

52. I am extremely furious.

That doesn't mean people who support the amendment hates gays. I've read the proponent sites. They've giving this song and dance about how the "private contract" claus will make everything right for gay rights. It won't.

The way to win these people over is through love, not hate.

[HotRodTuna]

117. +1

The way to win these people over is through love, not hate.

Apparently that's lost on the younger generation.

[froster]

175. Or maybe the younger generation is sick of appeasers and know-it-alls. nt

[HotRodTuna]

184. They better get used to dealing with them

because I don't think they're going away any time soon.

[LanternWaste]

198. Youth does tend to bring that

"Or maybe the younger generation is sick of appeasers and know-it-alls..."

Youth does tend to bring that particular dogmatic, fallacious melodrama to us...

[Posteritatis]

12. Not sure we should care much about the feelings of the people the OP's referring to. (nt)

[quinnox]

17. this kind of OP isn't exactly going to win them over

you catch more stuff with honey than you do with poison.

[Kurska]

20. I'm sick of coddling the feelings of bigots.

Homophobes need to feel the full force of history turning against them. Shit like what is going on in North Carolina is despicable and it is time to call a spade a spade.

[Luminous Animal]

22. I agree. And we have no national leaders to lead the charge of the public shaming of bigots.

[Duncan Grant]

68. Thank you for that moment of clarity.

I love your fire. Don't let some people convince you to extinguish it.

[Posteritatis]

27. At this point most of them aren't going to be won over anyway

I don't see why anyone would want to show any patience with people still in favor of legal barriers to interracial marriage or denying minorities the right to vote, and the gay marriage situation is precisely identical to either of those, and is exactly as contemptible.

[NorthCarolina]

28. So, it's safe to assume

that you're not entirely "on board" with gay unions. I ask this since the OP specifically directs comment to ONLY those that oppose equality for gay Americans, and yet you seem to have taken major offense.

[frylock]

45. kinda picked up on that vibe myself

[frylock]

44. this seems to have really struck a chord

[Duncan Grant]

65. And what would this "honey" strategy of yours look like?

I'm from the ACT-UP generation. Now THAT was social change.

However, I'm interested in a well-reasoned "honey" strategy regarding equal marriage. Got one?

And then there are some who hate it when gays get all up in their grill. Not that you're that person.

[morningfog]

71. Fuck them all. They can't be won over with honey. But, they will eventually die out.

[dbackjon]

103. Bullshit

[froster]

176. I'm so sick of that pansy-ass line it makes me wanna puke every time I see a DUer spew it. nt

[cyberswede]

177. How many times have you seen it in your 90 minutes of membership?

Just wondering...

[froster]

179. Aren't you observant? And wouldn't you like to know? ;-) nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

95. Name one.

"I have here in my hand a list of two hundred and five people that were known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping the policy of the State Department."
- Joe McCarthy

Callouts are antisocial. Callouts of strawmen are pointless and antisocial.

[maddezmom]

110. keep reading downthread and you'll fine one n/t

[noamnety]

57. Why not post it here?

Who's it gonna offend? The assholes who are worried the species is gonna die out if gays are allowed to marry? The assholes who worry about if there is not enough "stock" if you will as if gay people have a moral obligation to pretend to be straight so they can be used for breeding?

Or the assholes who claim promulgation of the species is their concern in one breath, and then in the next claim they're all for civil unions, but not marriage because the term marriage is associated with religious institutions?

Or the assholes who go on about how being gay should be a private issue - and go on to wonder why they have those public parades if they think it's nobody's business if they are gay?

--------
I'd like to think there aren't people like that on DU, and therefore nobody here would be offended by a simple statement that bigotry is disgusting, and we'll be glad to bury it when it's gone.

[froster]

178. +!!! nt

[Arugula Latte]

67. There are lots of rightwing bigots lurking here.

Trust me.

[Renew Deal]

80. Not just here.

They're everywhere and they do read DU.

[RetroLounge]

70. Thanks for outing yourself

There's the door...



RL

[fascisthunter]

86. .

[Renew Deal]

79. People have a right to be angry

[WilliamPitt]

84. Board nannies rule.

You know, or not.

[fascisthunter]

85. off-putting to who?

[lumberjack_jeff]

94. Anonymous preaching to an anonymous choir is a low risk activity. n/t

[HotRodTuna]

119. Exactly. But responding with anything but total agreement is not.

Last edited Wed May 9, 2012, 03:26 PM - Edit history (1)

Don't think, just agree and tell me how clever I am.

[TriMera]

124. Hey, HotShot! If you have a problem with LGBTQ rights, say it. n/t

[maddezmom]

125. LOL

you seem really worked up over this OP. btw...n/t usually isn't used when there is text in the message text box.

[progressoid]

105. Yeah why would someone post this on our Brony fansite??

Sheesh.

[Ruby the Liberal]

159. That image is hilarious.

Saved...

[froster]

180. My hero! nt

[racaulk]

129. Your concern is noted. n/t

[froster]

171. Yeah OP, how dare you?

Call out the bigots on the left? How dare you point out that the vote in NC was thanks entirely to religious folks? How dare you accuse any believer on the left of harboring homophobic attitudes?!

Don't you know that all DUers are beyond such reproach? If you don't, they will ban you to make the point.

[Great Caesars Ghost]

7. Hopefully sooner than later.

[uppityperson]

10. Are you saying everyone who doesn't support gay marriage is...old? Not sure what you mean, though I

agree with the sentiment that if you vote against marriage equality you are an enemy of mine.

Not sure what you are getting at with the age factor though. Thanks.

[Kurska]

15. I'm just referencing the demographics of the situation.

I'm sure there are young bigots, but they are the small minority of my generation. In 20 years people will shake their heads this was even an issue.

That doesn't mean I don't have respect for older folks who support gay marriage, like I said upthread it is hard to break with peers on issues like this.

[uppityperson]

62. Thanks for clarifying for me. That would be wonderful and I do think things are changing overall.

I guess the old folks I know are strongly supportive for the most part, like the young folks I know. I don't undersatnd why it is even an issue and look forward to a time when it isn't.

[WinniSkipper]

139. "like I said upthread it is hard to break with peers on issues like this."

Why do you think it is the pro-gay marriage people who are breaking away from the norm? If you go by the statistics, support for gay marriage decreases with age (at least currently). Wouldn't that mean that it is the antis who are breaking with us?

It's a little insulting.

[Posteritatis]

18. Obsolete's probably a better term.

There'll still be homophobic bigots twenty or thirty years from now, but the large majority of the most virulent ones will long since have started doing something productive with their biomass by then.

[Butterbean]

21. I don't think what the OP is saying is completely off base.

Even the NC House Speaker Thom Tillis said pretty much the same thing a few weeks ago. I remembered hearing the sound bite, and found this link:

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2012/03/27/3131790/tillis-gay-marriage-ban-likely.html

Nationally, I don't think it's as divided among age groups and generations, but here in NC, it is pretty distinct. The older people tend to be from very fundamentalist Christian roots, and draw from those beliefs.

[Bladian]

50. OP is saying that more older people are against it than younger people.

In general, at least. I'm 19, in university, and there's very few people who are against gay marriage. I've had Republicans in some of my classes nearly get laughed out because the younger generation is so (again, generally) liberal. I think that was the point. Things are going to start to shift so that as my generation grows older it will be more normal to accept marriage equality.

[Fumesucker]

19. The things they do look awful c-c-c-cold..

I hope I die before I get old..


Bear in mind that the civil rights era was nearly fifty years ago and we're *still* inundated with bigots and racists..

Indeed some of the very people who marched for civil rights for non-whites still can't admit that gays deserve the same rights as they do..

[abelenkpe]

111. But bigots are a smaller percentage of younger generations

In my experience as a woman working in what was once a heavily male dominated field working for a someone over 55 generally means having to work extra hard to prove myself to get past their preconceived notions. Working for a someone younger than that has never been as difficult. Does that mean there aren't young people who are sexists? No, but there are less of them. Gay marriage is similar. Years from now we will look back and talk about how shameful it was that there was anyone opposing it at all.
Right now extremists on the right are working hard to un do all that was gained during the civil rights movement. They are attacking affirmative action, women's right to choose and access to healthcare and actively seeking to deny rights to people based on their sexual orientation. Together we outnumber the bigots in overwhelming numbers.

[Fumesucker]

193. I suspect that the OP will be as disillusioned with his own generation at my age as I am with my own

The arc of progress may move forward on the average but it's by no means a smooth arc..

[cali]

24. good, but a much better phrase is marriage equality.

And if you don't think your generation doesn't spew plenty of ugly hate and bigotry, kiddo, you neat to get a fucking clue.

And stop with the fucking sanctimony.

[Cali_Democrat]

33. Yes, but the older generations definitely spew more hate and bigotry, my dear.

[cali]

38. probably, sweetie, but that doesn't mean that young people are

blameless when it comes to spewing hurt. Remember the charming kids who were twitting grotesque racial slurs against the black hockey player recently? And calling someone "gay" is a very common insult in schools.

as

[Cali_Democrat]

40. Of course I remember that, honey, but please see recent polls on marriage equality:

A new Gallup poll shows support for marriage equality steady at 50 percent nationwide. Both Democrats (65-34) and Independents (57-40) want same-sex marriage to be legal, but as David Badash notes, Republicans are becoming increasingly anti-gay (22-74). Again proving that the Bishops do not speak on behalf of their congregants, 51 percent of Catholics said they support marriage equality. Respondents who were younger were much more likely to endorse the freedom to marry, as were individuals with more advanced educations.

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2012/05/08/480252/poll-marriage-equality-support-strong-among-democrats-and-independents/?mobile=nc

Again, nobody ever said bigotry doesn't exist among all generations, my dear. The prevalence does differ.

[cali]

48. uh, prejudice against GLBT folks isn't the only prejudice honeypie.

yes, younger people are more supportive of marriage equality- they're also the ones that bully gay kids to fucking death, dear.

And the OP implied that younger people were just oh so enlightened.

[Cali_Democrat]

49. I know prejudice against GLBT folks isn't the only prejudice

Again, you're saying things that I never said, sweetheart. However, I could pull up even more polls that show younger generations are more supportive of things like interracial marriage, honey, but I don't really think I have to.

Things, they are a changin', sweetie.

[HotRodTuna]

153. honey, sweetheart, honeypie...are you two married?

just wondering

[MNBrewer]

54. Hit too close to home?

[JoePhilly]

26. Who on DU does not support gay marirage?

I'm straight, in my 40s, and support gay marriage ... and I worked in a Cemetery when I was in my teens.

BTW ... today, my wife of 20+ years, my 18 year old son, and I ... we all voted AGAINST Amendment one in NC.

I guess my point is that you might want to focus your anger at those who deserve it.

[NorthCarolina]

32. "focus your anger at those who deserve it"

The Subject of the OP reads "A message to anyone who doesn't support gay marriage"

Seems reasonably clear that is exactly what the OP does.

[JoePhilly]

69. Yes, and again ... who on DU does not support gay marriage?

Why yell at DU members?

I can't recall seeing anyone on DU say they were against gay marriage.

[Dawgs]

77. This is part of an ongoing trend on DU. It's sad.

Too bad we don't have the unlike button anymore. DU was a lot better back then. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

81. Well, if you are a supporter, then obviously this

OP is not directed at you. However, to think that there are no posters on DU against gay marriage is naieve.

[JoePhilly]

114. There may be, but I have not seen anyone post that they are against gay marriage.

[NorthCarolina]

174. Here you go!

Obamacare
86. Rethugs were saying that this doesn't help him politically

View profile
because a lot of conservative democrats don't support gay marriage. They were saying that some of these voters might stay home in Nov. I'm a conservative democrat and I definitely don't support gay marriage, but that doesn't mean I'm going to run out and vote for Mittens. The rethugs will be using this though to keep conservative dems and indys home and I hope they don't fall for it!!!

Here is a link to the thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014117237#post86

[froster]

181. Nicely done, NorthCarolina. That's called, "Ouch!" nt

[ScreamingMeemie]

182. Actually it's called "that poster is no longer with us because they are a bigot"...but then neither

are you... so, welcome to DU, so sorry you had to go.

[dbackjon]

104. Not Directly

But plenty tell us that it is not an important issue.

Plenty tell us not to make waves about it - because if we press too hard, we will end up with President Romney

Plenty tell us to be happy with any little gains that have been made.

[JoePhilly]

130. I guess I'd respond this way ...

Much of the debate on DU around this issue, as with so many other issues that get debated here on DU, is not a debate about the intended outcome, but on the tactics used to achieve it.

I'll give two examples, one I saw here on DU, and one that happened to me earlier today.

Example 1:
In a thread either last night, or maybe this AM, some one wrote an OP, and they were clearly (a) gay, and (b) very angry about Amendment 1 passing in NC, and (c) angry at Obama for not taking a sronger stand on this issue. The thread evolved in a manner that I'm sure you can surmise.

At some point, a person responded to the OP, and said that they thought (paraphrase) Obama was smart to not push to hard on this issue because its an issue that might coast him re-election. The OP responded by telling the poster that gays were tired of being told the STFU (again, paraphrasing). The poster responded to that by saying, "I'm gay", and "you don't speak for me or for all gays".

Example 2:
I live in Wake County NC. 57% of Wake County voted AGAINST Amendment 1. This morning, I took my laptop to a local Panera's, got a bagel, and did some email. While I was there, a gay couple I know came in, and they joined me briefly, and we discussed amendment one. I told them I was sorry it passed, that me, my wife and my son voted AGAINST, and that I was very proud that this was my 18 year old son's very first opportunity to vote. Someday, when gays can marry in every state, he'll remember his first vote. We agreed that ultimately, the young are going to fix this stupidity.

Then, Obama came up. And they began to argue. The one guy wanted Obama to fly to NC and hold a rally give his full and immediate support to gay marriage, to which his partner said, "Are you nuts? We need him to get re-elected first!!" They went back and forth. "Leadership" ... "President Romney" ... so on.

I stayed out of it. Until they stopped, and asked me what I thought. At which point I said ... "I'm not sure what Obama should do, but I do know that you two should be allowed to get married ... you already bicker like an old married couple anyway. Might as well let you make it official."

[CreekDog]

186. they are here

even among long time posters --even, gasp, a former moderator.

read it and weep.

[Posteritatis]

43. There's a realpolitik contingent here that would rather defer their support until "later."

They tend to become more obvious as the election campaigns heat up.

[Bohunk68]

112. And of course

they say the same damn thing each and every election. On, you want an unicorn farting rainbows, well, wait, not just now, there's an election coming up. Insert sarcasm thingee here.

[Posteritatis]

170. Of *course* I want a unicorn. I mean, duh.

If I can't get one I will of course settle for trivialities such as marriage equality, though.

[nclib]

34. Young people are our hope for the future.

I'm 51 with an 11 year old child. He is very aware of what is going on and has a great sense of social justice. He is my hope.

I think you should be directing some of your anger at people your own age though. If they had gotten out and voted in 2010 like they did in 2008 we wouldn't be in this mess. The democrats had a majority in this state for over 100 years until 2010 and now the republicans have the majority (and also got to draw the redistricting maps so we're screwed for a while longer). The democrats would have never brought up a gay marriage ban.

When I was your age I tried to get my peers to vote. They were apathetic then and I guess based on the results of 2010 young people still are.

But I do understand your anger and I feel it too (and the sadness). I really believe the youth can make a difference in this world and hope you keep fighting.

[eridani]

35. Minor nitpick

"Marriage equality is a more useful term than "gay marriage."

[sarcasmo]

36. Right on.

[kelly1mm]

37. You won't get many (any?) to respond directly to your message as DU automatically bans

any poster who does not support full marriage equality/gay marriage. I think it is the only true litmus test on policy issues that DU has.

[eallen]

41. Why "disguised as faith"?

I have no way to tell that the faith of those whose views I oppose is any less authentic than the faith of those whose views I approve.

[jeff47]

97. You can tell the difference by their actions

Many justify their bigotry by the prohibition against gay sex in Leviticus. "So sorry, we just have no choice in the matter. God says no."

The same people do not keep kosher, which is also required by Leviticus. If they truly believe they have no choice on gay sex, then they also have no choice about eating pork. Since they chow down on bacon and BBQ pork, they demonstrate that they actually do have a choice, and they chose bigotry.

[eallen]

197. Every faith interprets its scripture as it wants

They like the bigoted parts of the Bible.

You don't.

Theology can be woven for both views.

I don't like their faith. But I still have no basis for saying it is inauthentic faith.

[jeff47]

199. There really isn't any room for interpretation here.

Both activities are explicitly labeled abominations. There's no room for interpretation. Just one abomination ignored, and the other followed.

[eallen]

202. There's always interpretation. Faith picks and chooses scripture.

Not only does faith pick and choose which parts of scripture to heed, it picks and chooses what it counts as scripture.

Some faiths use one Bible. Some, a different Bible. Some, other scripture altogether.

Faith chooses whether to have a scripture. What to have as scripture. And how to take it.

That still gives me no reason to find one faith more authentic than another.

[Zorra]

42. Thanks, Kurska. You and most of the kids totally rock.

I know so many younger people who can't understand, and are horrified by, the widespread hatred for LGBT folks that has passed down through the generations.

I want to live to be healthy 100 yrs. old, and hope that someday you and I may dance together on the graves of all the soulless, pathetic, hate mongering bigots, such as the the ones that voted for this inhuman amendment in North Carolina.



Thank you for your passion, and for your compassion as well.

[redqueen]

46. LOL

Love this!

[Skittles]

47. relatively old f*** here

(55)....have always supported equal rights for gay folk, which includes marriage.

I do hope to see the opposition to this go the way of opposition to interracial marriage in my lifetime!!!

[Lifelong Protester]

92. Me too!

My husband and I are both officially AARPies, and we support marriage equality! Not all oldsters are bigots!!

[musical_soul]

51. I'm still hoping and praying for a miracle.

and I think it could happen. This election is not over yet, so I wouldn't call it a "probable" victory.

But you are right, if this amendment passes, we'll keep fighting. We'll fight until this amendment gets overturned once and for all. We'll already have to pick away at it the next few years if it passes because people will be challenging its meaning.

You know, I've had some concerns about so called "obamacare" in the past. If this amendment passes, I might very well put my full support behind it. Republicans (not all of them, and I don't agree with calling all the proponents of the amendment bigots) just seem to be making it harder and harder to get insurance. The nonsense has to stop.

[mwdem]

55. Im from N.C., and I am appalled this is up for a vote.

All of my family and friends in N.C. have voted against this.

[Fearless]

56. As went Gov. Wallace... so too will go anti-gay bigots. +1

[Logical]

58. Spend your time where it matters.

[Jamaal510]

59. Someone on here posted earlier that minority voters tend to oppose same-sex marriage.

As a Black man, that statistic made me ashamed because it paints it as though ALL of us are socially backwards. I support same-sex marriage to the fullest and would've voted against Amendment 1 if I lived in NC, and I am disappointed in all minorities who are fine with depriving anybody the right to get married. It makes us look like hypocrites after all the racism and xenophobia we have experienced in history.

[DevonRex]

73. Why on EARTH would you believe that "statistic?" It's FALSE. You should KNOW that, as a black man.

A few weeks ago you said that you didn't know the term "tar baby" was racist, either.

For your information, that "statistic" has been floated by people who would like nothing more than to pit the LGBTQ community against the African American community and vice versa. In other words, by right wingers who hate BOTH minority groups. Seriously, some critical thinking is required in politics, or at the very least some fact checking.

Here's a link with the facts, helpfully supplied by Luminous Animal:

http://www.letcaliforniaring.org/site/c.ltJTJ6MQIuE/b.4863891/k.35FC/Driving_Factors_of_Prop_8_Vote.htm

[Jamaal510]

74. That sounds like something feasible for the RW media to do--divide and conquer.

It's kinda foolish on my part to not take what I hear on the news with a grain of salt, anyway.

[DevonRex]

75. That's right.

Take it all with a grain of salt. Especially when someone or something makes you feel ashamed of who or what you are. That should always be a red flag. I'm neither black nor gay but I'll be damned if I'll stand by and let somebody make either group feel ashamed to be who they are or feed you false information. It's just not right.

[pnwmom]

60. I just learned that the N.C. amendment is even worse than I thought.

It would also permanently ban the legal recognition of couples in civil unions.

So there goes the argument that they're not trying to take away equal legal rights, or that it's only the use of the word "marriage" they object to.

[jeff47]

98. Unfortunately, many NC voters were in the same boat.

When polling companies explained amendment 1 banned civil unions, support plummeted.

So lots of NC voters went to the polls without bothering to find out what they were voting for.

[MellowDem]

63. Obama doesn't support gay marriage...

almost certainly for political reasons.

But still, very sad when the guy I will vote for puts his political strategy before the civil rights of others, and in all honesty, I don't see it as a good strategy anyways.

Kinda makes his speeches about other civil rights ring especially hollow and make him seem incredibly hypocritical.

[fruitsmoothie45]

93. I truly believe that

in Obama's second term, assuming that happens, he will do much, much more for civil rights. Without re-election hanging over his head, he'll most certainly do the right thing.

[pnwmom]

189. Oh yeah? I heard that he does.

[MellowDem]

196. Haha, touche!

I'm happy to have been proven wrong soon after posting this

[varelse]

64. That is a grave that will take many hands to dig

but we could finish it much sooner, if more people in your generation could be persuaded to vote now.

[Arugula Latte]

66. Yep. Most of you anti-gay folks are older and will DIE OUT.

And then we will implement gay marriage in all 50 states. And dance on your graves.

[Fla_Democrat]

72. Here ya go

http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact

[KG]

82. !

[HotRodTuna]

83. That was a heartwarming diatribe

I'm sure you'll change a lot of minds with that tone.

[fascisthunter]

88. yeah, well, that wasn't why it was posted, so....

... I don't think the poster needs to worry about their "tone".

[maddezmom]

90. yeah, lets worry about all the poor bigots reading DU

[HotRodTuna]

115. Well, it was posted on DU to DU readers

Do you think every single member of DU supports gay marriage? And if not, I guess the options are 1) banishment and a hope that they will spend eternity spinning in their filthy graves or 2) trying to convince them that it's a good idea.

Option 1 is a lot more fun and a lot easier I guess, plus it has the added bonus of getting to excercise some serious hate on people, which can be really rewarding.

Option 2 requires treating people as human beings, which can be a pain.

Excuse me but the OP was extremely mean spirited and will get exactly zero people
to change their minds. Otherwise it's all about hating the opposition; which only fuels their arguments.

If that's all too much, how about we have Obama read that letter to the American public and see how well it goes over?

[maddezmom]

116. I'm not concerned about stealth trolls or bigots that read DU and are offended

by this post. Are you one that needs to change their mind about equal rights for all or are you worried about the bigots? Is that hateful or mean sprited to ask?

The OP doesn't speak for the President so not sure why you'd think he wants to read this letter to the American public.

[justiceischeap]

118. Sometimes we get tired of hearing we have to handle this fight a certain way

There have been people on DU that feel that equality should always be put on the back-burner for the sake of winning elections. That there are things much more important than the fight for equality. There have been people on DU that have told the LGBT*.* community that we should fight this a certain way or to be quiet or not to use "angry" words.

I speak for myself when I say this; don't tell me how to fight my fight. Don't tell me I'm not allowed to be pissed off because it's okay to use my community as a political football, that it's okay for people to vote against equality, in essence telling me I don't matter as much as the next person. I'm tired of people apologizing for "good folks" who vote incorrectly. I'm tired of people saying that it's okay for the Dem Party to support states that blatantly support discrimination. I'm tired of people saying they support equality then don't do as much as they can to help usher in equality. I'm tired of being told that everyone on DU supports equality when there is direct evidence that not all DU'ers support equality. I'm tired of being blamed for losing an election because there are some on DU that DO blame the LGBT*.* community for election losses. I'm tired of some people inferring it's not okay to be angry the day after my rights are voted away by hateful, fear-filled, bigoted people.

When people start voting to take away your (meant in the general) rights, come talk to me about tone.

[TriMera]

123. ^^This^^ n/t

[Morning Dew]

122. Hey, guess what, fellow DU member?

DU supports full equal rights for gays and lesbians.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

No bigoted hate speech.

Do not post bigotry based on someone's race or ethnic origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or lack thereof, disability, or other comparable personal characteristic. To be clear: This includes any post which states opposition to full equal rights for gays and lesbians

So you can oppose full equality - if you post about it, you'll take your chances with admin.

[HotRodTuna]

155. Guess what, my post was in regard to the hateful tone

not the subject matter. Or does that count as "opposition"?

Supporting marraige equality is one thing, telling people you hope they spin in their graves is over the top (in my opinion. Am I allowed to have one or do I have to clear it first?)

[maddezmom]

158. so do you support marriage equality?

[Morning Dew]

162. Sorry, I thought you asked "Do you think every single member of DU supports gay marriage?"

Oh, wait. You did.

[Ruby the Liberal]

168. If they want to abide by TOS, they will keep it to themselves.

Others apparently feel so strongly that they just dont give a shit.

[TeeYiYi]

91. Hit a nerve? ...nt

TYY

[AtheistCrusader]

87. Amen.

[shagsak]

96. Gay Marriage will never happen

It's all about the terminology. Marriage is a biblical term for man and woman's union. Christians don't believe in same sex marriage because of that language. But that's only BIBLICAL marriage. If a person isn't Christian then I don't understand what forcing a religious institution to recognize them achieves. Trust me, it will never happen - it's a losing battle you will not win.

Gay couples should be able to enter into a civil union and be granted the same RIGHTS as every other married heterosexual couple without exception. Homosexuals have every right to be just as completely miserable as the rest of us. IMHO a Christian's stance on civil unions separates the bigots from the true Christians. We should love and try to help each other, not hate.

If this compromise is not made, EVERY generation will butt heads on this issue and it will never be resolved. If you truly love the person you are with, what you call the union shouldn't matter - only that you are recognized and treated equally.

[jeff47]

100. We tried "separate but equal" once. It didn't go so well.

If your argument is correct, I can't be married. I'm an atheist. Yet I get to check the "married" box on all sorts of government forms.

If this compromise is not made, EVERY generation will butt heads on this issue and it will never be resolved.

No, when the baby boomers die off it will pass easily. "Gen X" and younger overwhelmingly support gay marriage.

If you truly love the person you are with, what you call the union shouldn't matter - only that you are recognized and treated equally.

We tried separate but equal once. That didn't work out very well.

[shagsak]

128. You are partially right

Yes, as an atheist you could get married legally. However, if you are an atheist wouldn't you prefer to have a civil union to avoid association with a religion you didn't believe in - so long as you had the same legal rights? Or would you prefer to get married in a church?

The theory that the baby boomers are the sole supporters of this agenda is compelling, however their argument is actually based on biblical history and shared among others. Since these things are taught in the Church, unless the Bible changes (hence the teachings that are passed down), the institution will remain. I'm not sure how a new generation could read the Bible differently, unless they specifically chose to ignore those parts.

Your analogy relating "separate but equal" to this issue is, IMO, way off. If you grant civil unions to homosexuals and hence, grant them the same rights as any other married couple, how would they be separate as it was when "colored people" had to use "separate" facilities such as restrooms and water fountains? Also, those ideals were based on prejudice, not religion.

You don't have to be religious (See 1st Amend). And you shouldn't have to be religious to enjoy the rights that a religious American enjoys (See Constitution). A compromise must be made so that this is the reality.

[Ruby the Liberal]

134. What you are proposing is not compromise.

What you are proposing is lesser than equal. Suck it up and be happy with it, and all that.

Not. Good. Enough.

[jeff47]

151. Marriage is not a religious word

if you are an atheist wouldn't you prefer to have a civil union to avoid association with a religion you didn't believe in - so long as you had the same legal rights? Or would you prefer to get married in a church?

Yes, lots of religions have marriage ceremonies. And lots of non-religious institutions have marriage ceremonies. For example, my wife and I were married in a casino in Las Vegas. "God" was never mentioned.

I do not want a civil union, because separate is inherently not equal.

The theory that the baby boomers are the sole supporters of this agenda is compelling, however their argument is actually based on biblical history and shared among others.

The problem with this argument is you aren't bothering to find out what public opinion polls show. You're pontificating from your own prejudices.

"Gen X" and "Gen Y" overwhelmingly support marriage equality. Baby boomers and older overwhelmingly oppose it. Baby boomers will die before Gen X and Gen Y, removing their votes. Thus, marriage equality will happen. Gen X and Gen Y have already been through all the "bible study" they would need for indoctrination to take hold, and they still support marriage equality.

I'm not sure how a new generation could read the Bible differently, unless they specifically chose to ignore those parts.

It changes because they realize they don't get to force other people to follow their religion. They are far more "live and let live" than the baby boomers.

Your analogy relating "separate but equal" to this issue is, IMO, way off. If you grant civil unions to homosexuals and hence, grant them the same rights as any other married couple, how would they be separate as it was when "colored people" had to use "separate" facilities such as restrooms and water fountains?

"Apartment for rent. Only married couples". This isn't difficult to figure out how civil unions would be considered "second class". Mostly because it would be a repeat of segregation.

You don't have to be religious (See 1st Amend). And you shouldn't have to be religious to enjoy the rights that a religious American enjoys (See Constitution). A compromise must be made so that this is the reality.

No, no compromise is necessarily.

Religions can already discriminate on who they can marry. I can't get married in most Catholic churches, because I'm not Catholic. I can't get married in most synagogues because I'm not Jewish. I can't get married in most evangelical churches, because I'm not Christian. I can't get married in most Mosques, because I'm not Muslim.

Legalizing "gay marriage" does not require any religion to recognize or perform that marriage any more than they are required to recognize or perform my atheist heterosexual marriage. What it does require is the legal system to recognize that marriage. And the legal system is, according to the Constitution, completely secular.

[Ruby the Liberal]

120. You do understand that there is more at stake here from a legal perspective, no?

Federal recognition means equality in taxes, estates, benefits, medical directives, having and adopting children - this list is almost endless.

[shagsak]

133. Absolutely

And these are the rights that every American is entitled to.

[justiceischeap]

121. Gay marriage will never happen... with attitudes like yours

Marriage isn't something "owned" by the religious right wingnuts. The Unitarian church has no problem calling it marriage, Episcopalians have no problem calling it marriage, Jews have no problem calling it marriage... no forward-thinking religion has a problem calling it marriage. As Jeff47 said, separate but equal does not work nor should it be encouraged.

[shagsak]

132. attitudes like mine?

I think I have a more progressive stance on this issue than any other Christian you will ever meet. I support equality for homosexuals. Religious right wingnuts? Turn your blinders off. It is the definition of the word marriage and what it means to Christians that you are fighting to change - unless a religion does not follow the bible, that is what they believe.

[Ruby the Liberal]

135. So we should just let them continue on in their bigotry?

I can't believe I am reading this on DU.

You have gone so far off the cliff here that you don't even want equality - you want to distance yourself from anything that may smack of "they do too". They have marriage - so "others" (gay folk, atheists) will just go make up their own word/laws.

Never thought I would see that kind of crap here.

[TriMera]

136. You don't get to define marriage, period.

You don't have ownership of the word. The state issues marriage licenses, not the church.

[Ruby the Liberal]

141. There you go again.

Inserting those pesky little facts into a perfectly good fact-free rant.

Tsk.

[TriMera]

144. I know, maybe someday I'll learn.

But, probably not.

[justiceischeap]

150. You may very well have a progressive stance based on YOUR religious leanings

but that doesn't mean that it's okay to state "marriage" is only okay for christians whilst everyone who isn't christian only gets a civil union. Or is it only gays that get the civil union? Pagan's or atheists can still refer to themselves as married as long as they are a man & woman, right? Do you really want to use religion as a basis for your argument? Because I can argue that my interpretation of the bible doesn't condemn committed homosexual relationships. It condemns using same-sex rape as a tool against your enemies, it condemns using same-sex sex as idolatry but not once does the bible talk about committed homosexual relationships as being wrong. Hell, I can interpret several stories in the bible as pro-gay love stories. I can point out a story about a roman soldier bringing his male lover to Jesus to be healed and Jesus heals him. You'd think that he wouldn't do that if being in a gay relationship was worthy of condemnation or death.

[LeftyMom]

127. Marriage precedes Christianity (by a very long time) and separate but equal never works.

Also, if you're afraid of lgbt people dirtying up the word marriage with gay cooties or something you really need to examine your homophobia, because you're not as forward thinking on this issue as you apparently think.

[Ruby the Liberal]

137. I'm reading just the opposite

That this one wants to have his/her own 'separate but equal category' for atheists, gays, whoever else so as not to sully those relationships by having a word in common with Christian cooties.

[shagsak]

138. No

What you are calling marriage is a union between people that has existed throughout time - before it had a name. Actual "marriage" is a religious institution.

You can start calling chocolate, vanilla but it will still be chocolate. The word means what it means. It has been used as a wedge for right wingers to deny rights to homosexuals for a long time. You have to know the battle to fight it.

I never claimed to be forward thinking, just pro equality - and I am not homophobic.

[Ruby the Liberal]

140. Pro equality? No you aren't.

You are saying let Christians have their word, we will make up a shiny new one all our own and create the laws to go with it.

That isn't equality - that is separatism.

[LeftyMom]

142. Marriage is not a religious institution. That's why it's culturally universal in one form or another

even in societies which observe completely different religions or that aren't particularly religious at all.

If you go drag a person of the opposite sex (or the same if your state permits) down to the courthouse, cut a check and sign some legal papers you're married. If you're on a ship and the captain officiates you're married. Neither ceremony is slightly religious unless you choose for it to be so, and religiosity of any variety makes it no more or less socially or legally valid.

[shagsak]

143. Well, great then!

I just wanted to give you the perspective of a Christian that truly wants LGBT's to have the same rights as any other American. And I have been TOLD WHATS UP!

I'm not going to relent in my belief's. I hope all of you find happiness.

FYI, there are such things as religious liberals. It's a pretty big tent.

[JackBeck]

145. Religious Liberals from New Jersey who support marriage equality:

120 Clergy from 19 Faiths in the State of New Jersey

Monday, January 4, 2010

Senate President Richard J. Codey
Assembly Speaker Joseph J. Roberts, Jr.
The State House
Trenton, New Jersey 08625

Dear Governor Codey and Speaker Roberts:

We are 120 clergy members across New Jersey from 19 faiths and denominations. We are but a sample of New Jersey clergy who support marriage equality and wish to marry same-sex couples legally.

We are Baptist, Buddhist, Episcopal, Ethical Culture Society, Interfaith, Jewish Conservative, Jewish Reconstructionist, Jewish Reform, Lutheran, Metropolitan Community Church, Methodist, Presbyterian, Reformed Church of America, Sankey Tribe, St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church, Unitarian Universalist, United Church of Christ and Unity Fellowship Church. Among us are members of the Religious Society of Friends, the Quakers, who do not have clergy.

We 120 clergy members ask you to put the marriage equality bill to a vote in your respective houses - without precondition - before the end of the current legislative session.

In our nation founded on the separation of church and state, the State of New Jersey should not be in the business of telling faiths and clergy whom we can or cannot legally marry. We take issue with the State's current marriage law, which is not religiously neutral but reflects the beliefs of leaders of a particular faith community which opposes marriage equality.

We 120 clergy members support the freedom of religion embodied by the U.S. Constitution, the New Jersey Constitution and the marriage equality bill now before the New Jersey legislature, the Freedom of Religion and Equality in Civil Marriage Act. Language in the bill underscores the right of every religion and every clergy member to decide whom to marry and not to marry.

Furthermore, an amendment to the bill passed by the Senate Judiciary Committee last month would codify the nation's strongest protections for religious freedom in matters of marriage. The amendment ensures that no religious organization or religious facility in New Jersey can be sued because it has followed its conscience in which marriages it chooses to accommodate, or not accommodate.

There cannot be a better guarantor of religious freedom than the version of the Freedom of Religion and Equality in Civil Marriage Act now before you.

We are proud that our nation has never allowed any one religious doctrine to determine secular law. New Jersey law provides for divorce, for example, though some find divorce religiously impermissible. Indeed, the idea of New Jersey's banning civil divorce would be unthinkable. Our state would not stand for favoring the convictions of any one religion over another.

As 120 clergy across New Jersey from 19 faiths and denominations, we urgently ask you to put the marriage equality bill to a vote in your respective houses - without precondition - before the end of the current legislative session. The State must get out of our sanctuaries and uphold our religious freedom as clergy to marry whom we wish, or don't wish, under State law.

We appreciate your thoughtful consideration.
Sincerely,

Rabbi Joel Abraham, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Victor Appell, Jewish Reform
Rev. Meg Barnhouse, Unitarian Universalist
Bishop Mark Beckwith, Episcopal
Leader Rafaela Billini, Buddhist
Rev. Fred Blanken, Sankey Tribe
Rev. David C. Bocock, United Church of Christ
Rev. Dr. Thomas Bohache, Metropolitan Community Church
Rabbi Neal Borovitz, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Andrew Bossov, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Kenneth L. Brickman, Jewish Reform
Rev. Christopher Bruesehoff, Lutheran
Rev. Rene Colson Hudson, American Baptist
Dr. Joseph C. Chuman, Ethical Culture Society
Rev. Matthew Cimorelli, Lutheran
Rev. Diana Clark, Episcopal
Rev. Susan Nelson-Colaneri, Lutheran
Rabbi Faith Joy Dantowitz, Jewish Reform
Rev. Bruce Davidson, Lutheran
Michael Dawson, Religious Society of Friends (the Quakers)
Rev. Peter DeFranco, Lutheran
Rev. David DeSmith, Episcopal
Rabbi Stephanie Dickstein, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Robert Janis-Dillon, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Thomas Dorsey, Lutheran
Rev. Wayne Dreyman, Lutheran
Rev. L.L. DuBreuil, United Church of Christ
Rev. Dr. Jeffrey C. Eaton, Lutheran
Rev. Rusty Eidmann-Hicks, United Church of Christ
Rabbi Paula Feldstein, Jewish Reform
Rev. Mary Forrell, Lutheran
Rev. Bryan Franzen, Presbyterian
Rabbi Elyse Frishman, Jewish Reform
Rev. Maristella Freiberg, Episcopal
Rev. Anahi Galante, Interfaith
Rev. Debra Given, Presbyterian
Rev. John Graf, Interfaith
Cantor Meredith Greenberg, Jewish Conservative
Rabbi Jarah Greenfield, Jewish Reconstructionist
Rabbi David Greenstein, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Carol Haag, Unitarian Universalist
Rabbi Debra R. Hachen, Jewish Reform
Rev. Dr. Betsey Hall, Presbyterian
Rabbi Richard Hammerman, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Rose Hardy, Liberation in Truth Unity Fellowship Church
Rev. Rose Hassan, Episcopal
Father Joseph A. Harmon, Episcopal
Rev. Margaret Hayes, Lutheran
Rev. Alicia Heath-Toby, Liberation in Truth Unity Fellowship Church
Rev. Margaret Herz-Lane, Lutheran
Bishop Jacquelyn Holland, Unity Fellowship Church
Rev. Janyce Jackson, Liberation in Truth Unity Fellowship Church
Rev. Seth Kaper-Dale, Reformed Church in America
Catherine Karsten, Religious Society of Friends (the Quakers)
Rev. Katherine G. Killebrew, Presbyterian
Rabbi Donna Kirschbaum, Jewish Reconstructionist
Rev. Robert Kriesat, Lutheran
Teacher Peter Kurczynski, Buddhist
Rabbi Alfred Landsberg, Jewish Reform
Rev. Gary C. LeCroy, Lutheran
Rabbi Darby Jared Leigh, Jewish Reconstructionist
Rev. Fred Lentz, Lutheran
Rabbi Ellen Lewis, Jewish Reform
Rabbi David C. Levy, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Adina Lewittes, Jewish Conservative
Cantor Erica J. Lippitz, Jewish Conservative
Rabbi Sharon Litwin, Jewish Reform
Bishop George Lucey, St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church
Rev. Murdoch MacPherson, Lutheran
Rabbi Randall Mark, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Alison B. Miller, Unitarian Universalist
Rabbi Jordan Millstein, Jewish Reform
Rev. Manish Mishra, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Rob Morris, Presbyterian
Rabbi Leana Moritt, Jewish Renewal
Rev. William C. Moser, Lutheran
Rabbi Robin Nafshi, Jewish Reform
Rev. Julie Newhall, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Tiina Nummela, Lutheran
Rev. Clark Olson-Smith, Lutheran
Rev. Sara Olson-Smith, Lutheran
Rev. Charles Bluestein Ortman, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Michelle Owings-Christian, Sankey Tribe
Rev. Fairbairn Powers, Episcopal
Rev. Dr. Susan Veronica Rak, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Ann Ralosky, United Church of Christ
Rev. Donald R. Ransom, Unity Fellowship Church
Rabbi Esther Reed, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Christine Regan, Episcopal
Rev. Elsie Rhodes, Presbyterian
Rabbi Jonathan Roos, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Francine Roston, Jewish Conservative
Rev. Dr. Charles T. Rush, United Church of Christ
Rev. Leah Doberne-Schor, Jewish Reform
Rev. Marshall Shelly, Episcopal
Rabbi Rebecca Sirbu, Jewish Conservative
Rabbi Steven Sirbu, Jewish Reform
Rev. Carlton Elliott Smith, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Vanessa Southern, Unitarian Universalist
Cantor Kerith Spencer-Shapiro, Jewish Reform
Rabbi Cy Stanway, Reform Judaism
Rev. Randy Steinman, Lutheran
Rev. Charles Stephens, Unitarian Universalist
Rev. Douglas Stivison, United Church of Christ
Rev. David L. Stoner, Lutheran
Thomas Swain, Religious Society of Friends (the Quakers)
Rebecca Sylvan, Religious Society of Friends (the Quakers)
Elder Rev. Kevin E. Taylor, Unity Fellowship Church
Rabbi Elliott Tepperman, Jewish Reconstructionist
Rev. Matt A. Thiringer, Lutheran
Rev. Charles N. Thompson, Presbyterian
Rev. Mary Tiebout, United Church of Christ
Rev. Ray VandeGiessen, Presbyterian
Rev. Gus Vinajeras, Lutheran
Rev. Paul Walker, Episcopal
Rev. Moacir Weirich, United Church of Christ
Rev. Dr. Traci C. West, United Methodist
Rev. David Wolf, Episcopal
Rev. Jeffrey B. Ziegler, Lutheran
Rabbi Ruth A. Zlotnick, Jewish Reform

[TriMera]

147. What's up is a separation of church and state.

That is a liberal value. You may have your religion, you just can't push it on me by trying to make me live by laws based on your faith.

[Ruby the Liberal]

148. I know there are - I are one.

And whatever radio program told you "whats up" is obviously not in favor of equal rights.

Marriage is a legal contract that is recognized by governments world wide.

Christians do not OWN that word - so stop trying to give it to them. It doesn't belong to them.

[LeftyMom]

149. Stop blaming bigotry on your invisible friend.

He's not picking up the phone, and half of his buddies say he told them something else anyhow.

If you don't want full social and legal equality for LGBT people put your big boy pants on and own up to it.

[shagsak]

152. Not a Bigot, Not a Homophobe

Just a Christian who hates to see persecution. You don't have to understand if you don't want to. Look down on me and persecute me all you want. I will forgive you.

[LeftyMom]

154. Recognizing other people's rights isn't persecuting you. Nobody's going to make you marry a dude.

A gay person getting married persecutes you in the same way that a Jew is persecuted by your eating a cheeseburger.

[HotRodTuna]

156. Maybe you shouldn't mock his "invisible friend"

Because that's pretty offensive to religous people.

[LeftyMom]

190. Homophobia is very offensive to decent people.

[Ruby the Liberal]

160. Gee, thats a relief.

I know *I* will sleep better tonight.

[Posteritatis]

188. Please explain how permitting people to marry persecutes you. (nt)

[Zhade]

201. Marriage is NOT solely religious. Married atheist couples are still married.

And the simple fact is, we will never accept separate-but-unequal -- SO GET THE FUCK OVER IT AND GET OUT OF THE WAY.

[blueamy66]

99. A co-worker of mine just lost his "companion" of 28 years

They had adopted a boy together. The boy is now 18 and one of his Dad's bought a car for him, under his name.

As he just passed away, the car is gone.

My co-worker couldn't even sign any "death" paperwork.....the companion's kids had to do so. He was once even forbitten from visiting him in the hospital.

I'm not even married to my guy, but was free to see him whenever I wanted when he was in the hospital. We both just said that we were married.....no questions asked.....

Total, utter bullshit.

[Bohunk68]

113. When my partner

of 27 years passed, I couldn't sign for his cremation, nor for the cremains. His brother, who might see him once every few years or so, could. Thanks be, he did. And, I live in NY, where we could now be married.

[blueamy66]

194. I wish that I could change things.....

They were married in CA, but the marriage wasn't recognized in AZ.

Together for 28 years and "nothing" to show for it.

Like I said, complete, utter bullshit.

[The Link]

107. People tend to be selective when applying the term "bigot".

For example, I would wager that many would not apply that descriptor to our President. In fact, many would argue endlessly that we should all disregard some of his words and actions on the subject of gay citizens.

[HotRodTuna]

157. Well, check the news today. He just owned up.

So much for holding his cards until after the election. We'll see how that works out.

[Ruby the Liberal]

161. "owned up"?

[HotRodTuna]

164. Yes, he's been very cagey about his stance

and now he made it clear-ish. I'd say that's owning up.

[Ruby the Liberal]

166. I have seen enough.

[HotRodTuna]

183. Ok...not sure what that's supposed to mean

I'm glad he came out for it, it was the right thing to do.

[maddezmom]

163. owned up? kind of an odd phrase for supporting marriage

[HotRodTuna]

165. Considering that most people assumed he was for it

even though his past statements said he was against it, I think that's a resonable description. I think he wanted to get through the election without taking a stance, now he has. I'm sure he would have preferred not to have to, since he probably fears that he has more to lose than to gain out of it but I'm glad he finally clarified his stance.

[maddezmom]

167. so do you support marriage equality? n/t

[abelenkpe]

108. And younger generations will only remember them with shame. Nt

[Rex]

126. I am so thankful your generation is more tolerant

then my parents generation. I am one of the lost kids from generation X. The start of it all.

[lovemydog]

146. Thank you - you give me hope for the future

and you are correct. I hope you'll keep posting here. I enjoy hearing from folks in your age group.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

187. those people are backward thinking

We are going forward

[lynne]

195. I don't think that age totally defines this issue -

- as those both pro and con are of every age. I'm an oldster and will be happy when gay marriage is accepted everywhere. Yet I spoke to a 20 yr. old young lady this evening who is very much against it.