People who support traditional marriage are not “homophobes” (a made up/etymologically incorrect word).
People who support traditional marriage are not bigots.
Sure you are. Are you trying to deny any other nonheteronormative groups marriage rights? Furries can still get married, to the best of my knowledge. (Apologies to the furries, I think you have the right to do what makes you happy, but I'm kind of surprised that the religious right hasn't started boycotting you yet.) Besides that, how can you construe denying a group civil rights as anything other than bigoted?
As to "entymologically incorrect/made up word": all words are made up. At some point, somebody pointed at a tree, said "tree" and there we were. Does this asshat honestly think that sounds have inherent meaning? If so, why are there so many different languages?
People who support traditional marriage most likely see it as a wise move for society.
Children do best with a married mom and dad. People who support traditional marriage want to do everything they can to help their society present the best possible situations for children: keeping marriage exclusive is one way to achieve this goal. Look, in a perfect world, every child would have a mommy and a daddy and a doggy and a house with a white picket fence. Do we live in that world? For the most part, gays ADOPT children. (not that i have anything against gays using surrogates and/or sperm donors, i'm just dealing with what the law addresses) If a child is adopted, clearly they didn't have a mommy and a daddy, etc. So, yonicsymbolsquared thinks bouncing from foster home to foster home or group home to group home is better for a child than a stable home that involves two daddies or two mommies.
See, here's the part of that these bigots never address. Gays aren't stealing children from stable, heteronormative homes with stay at homes. They're getting children that have no other chance at love and stability. Way to go, asshat, you helped pass legislation that makes it harder for children to find love.
Marriage is exclusive for a reason. Its exclusivity encourages participation (which means commitment, stability, sacrifice). Sure, marriage is like the latest hot club in LA, the more people who can't get in, the more people who want to. Which is why the divorce rate is so high. Gays just want to get married because it's the cool thing to do. By that logic, we should allow people to marry their livestock, and then the gays won't want to get married at all.
People can support traditional marriage and love their brothers at the same time. as long as he's not gay.
A gay brother is not justification for stripping children of their right to a mom and a dad. nobody is suggesting removing the right to marry from heteros. nobody is suggesting taking children from supportive, loving hetero homes and moving them to gay homes. the only thing the removal of prop 8 would accomplish is to make heteros not quite so special.
The existence of homosexuality is not justification for changing the foundational unit of any society: a man and a woman. actually, that's not the foundational unit of every society. many societies are based on polygymy: one man and one woman and one more woman and yet another woman. at least one society is based on polyandry: one woman and one man and another man, and a few more men. some societies are truly socialist: children are raised communally and there is no personal property. don't project our normatives onto everyone, yonicsquared.
"(Apologies to the furries, I think you have the right to do what makes you happy, but I'm kind of surprised that the religious right hasn't started boycotting you yet.)"
ReplyDeleteDo the Chistofascists even know what furries are? It seems like they wouldn't go digging for new "abominations" when there are so many gays to hate right out in plain sight.
the christofacists move from one "greatest of all evuls" to the next. first it was blacks wanting civil rights, then women who work, then divorce, then single mothers, then daycare, now gays.
ReplyDeletei figure, at some point the whole "teh gay is TEH EVUL" thing will fall out of vogue like all the rest and then on to what? all i can think of is furries.
which would engender many delightful discussions about the furrie lifestyle.
On another note I was raised to be Christian, I'm not now. I still took things from the religion because some good things came out of it, like the Ten Commandments. Good rules, good value there accept the one about worshiping the fake guy. Any way the point I'm trying to make here is that it distinctly says 1 not to judge, 2 to stay the fuck out of political agendas, and 3 to love and respect each other, unless that person is truly evil then none of this should be a problem accept that your blinded by your own ignorance and sine one passage in the bible says gays are wrong you run with it. Let me just tell you that it also says that a man lays with a man and woman with woman and its all good. That's a little closer to the end.
ReplyDeleteOh and just in case you weren't aware, they found the ripple in space from the Big Bang, science proved in the 80's prayer works but it doesn't matter to whom or what you pray too, so shoes are gods, and science has now proven that your energy in your body can leave your body, and that there is a massive collection of this energy. Sorry folks but your praying to yourselves and everyone else. Ty to connect your self with that energy instead pretending to know its name and what it wants. I hear DMT can help you achieve that and you create it in your own body.
ReplyDeleteGotta say they are not the exact definition of a bigot, but...big·ot
ReplyDeleteˈbigət/
noun
noun: bigot; plural noun: bigots
1.
a person who is bigoted.
"religious bigots"
synonyms: chauvinist, partisan, sectarian; More
Origin
late 16th cent. (denoting a superstitious religious hypocrite): from French, of unknown origin.
They are pretty fucking close.
Delete