The more important issue to me is the question of why people fear legal recognition of gay relationships. I have a lesbian cousin, who is in a long term relationship with a terrific person. How would legal recognition of that union inb any way threaten my marriage, or any other hetero union? Its just beyond me. The only explanation I can see is homophobia.


That is offensive to me.  I have religious reasons to believe that gay marriage is wrong.  That does not make me homophobic.  I know it doesn't threaten hetero marriages, I just believe it is wrong.  People can believe differently than you and not be wrong or phobic...it is an opinion.  I have a feeling that a majority of the people who oppose gay marriage do so for the same reasons I do.

That is offensive to me.  I have religious reasons to believe that gay marriage is wrong.  That does not make me homophobic.  I know it doesn't threaten hetero marriages, I just believe it is wrong.  People can believe differently than you and not be wrong or phobic...it is an opinion.




Dagwood you are clearly wrong.  You see, if you hold an opinion opposite to the "PC View", you are by definition either a bigot, a hater, or a fill-in-the-blank-o-phobe.

:P

Dagwood you are clearly wrong. You see, if you hold an opinion opposite to the "PC View", you are by definition either a bigot, a hater, or a fill-in-the-blank-o-phobe.

:P


I know, what was I thinking? :P

Dagwood you are clearly wrong.  You see, if you hold an opinion opposite to the "PC View", you are by definition either a bigot, a hater, or a fill-in-the-blank-o-phobe.

:P
HEY....you forgot about ME!

That is offensive to me.  I have religious reasons to believe that gay marriage is wrong.  That does not make me homophobic.  I know it doesn't threaten hetero marriages, I just believe it is wrong.  People can believe differently than you and not be wrong or phobic...it is an opinion.  I have a feeling that a majority of the people who oppose gay marriage do so for the same reasons I do.



I'm sorry you find it offensive, and I respect your right to your religious beliefs.  Keep them in your church and out of our laws.  No one is advocating that churches should perform gay marriages if they choose  not to, simply that the state should provide legal recognition for gay unions.  There are lots of things various religious groups find sinful, like eating pork.  Should those prohibitions also become part of our legal structure? 

The reason we have separation of church and state in the United States was because the founders were well aware of the ramifications of state sanctioned religion.  My ancestors were held in slavery and the goodness of slavery was extolled from the pulpits of America. I would suggest it best to leave the religious aspect out of the debate, and try to stick to a debate on what you believe the merits, or consequences to society.

I'm sorry you find it offensive, and I respect your right to your religious beliefs. Keep them in your church and out of our laws. No one is advocating that churches should perform gay marriages if they choose not to, simply that the state should provide legal recognition for gay unions. There are lots of things various religious groups find sinful, like eating pork. Should those prohibitions also become part of our legal structure?


I am not saying my church should establish the laws of the country.  I am saying that just because people think gay marriage is wrong doesn't make them homophobic.  I am not advocating a church run government.

I'm sorry you find it offensive, and I respect your right to your religious beliefs.  Keep them in your church and out of our laws.  No one is advocating that churches should perform gay marriages if they choose  not to, simply that the state should provide legal recognition for gay unions.  There are lots of things various religious groups find sinful, like eating pork.  Should those prohibitions also become part of our legal structure? 


You CAN NOT keep individual people's religious beliefs out of the legal and political system.  People vote for politicians, referenda, etc... based on what they believe to be best for either themselves or society.  So the idea that beliefs can be kept out of the legal system is a pipe dream.

As long as a law passes muster with the constitution and was legally enacted via legislative procedures, or direct referendum vote, I have no problem with a religiously-originated policy or law.

By the way... lack of a "religion" is a "religion" of its own.

I stray a bit off topic here, sorry.





By the way... lack of a "religion" is a "religion" of its own.

I don't agree with that.  Atheism is not the same as religion no matter how zealously it is  practiced. At the same time, I wish atheists were not so threatened by the religious beliefs of others.  After all, religion is not a hideous state conspiracy to keep the populus docile.  I mean, the American Christian Right treats it as such, and those of us who wish to keep church and state separate should oppose the Christian Right vigorously.  Furthermore, if a faction of fundamentalist Jews or fundamentalist Muslims should rise in political power, we should oppose them just as vigorously.
I'm still ambivalent where to draw the line in public schools.  Prayer? Definitely not.  If the school wants to observe a holiday with "educational" activities, I don't have a problem with it.  I went to a Waldorf elementary school.  We learned everything from Greek myths,* to the story of Jesus, to the story of Buddha, and the story of Mohammed.  We observed Christmas with elaborate candle ceremonies, advent calendars, carols, and so forth.  We also learned about Chaunaka.  None of us ever found these things intrusive or offense, and neither did our parents.
Being a private school, there were prayers, but the were of the ecumenical and theosophical persuasion.
Unfortunately, those who push for prayer in public schools tend not to be your ecumenicals or theosophists.  They tend to be stark-raving Bible-thumping evangelical fundamentalists who would like nothing more than to start the morning with a rain of fire and brimstone, and reference HELL as the destiny for all children who do not accept Jesus as their personal lord and savior. 
That's the biggest reason I'm so adamant against letting the religious camel get his nose into the  public school tent.
::)

*The Greek myths are basically lurid tales of sex and violence, so as children we got a rather expurgated and simplistic version.  I suppose it's not such a great idea to tell fifth graders stories of children murdering their parents, and fathers raping their daughters, and so forth...
:o