Agreed.
I agree with Clint Eastwood whole heartily here. I don’t give a fuck about gay marriage. As far as I am concerned, people should be free to live their lives as fully as possible. One of the things I find most distressing about so many Christians is there raw hatred for homosexuals (i.e., Tony Perkins and the Family Research Council). Supposedly they are protecting the “sanctity” of marriage, but that is really most often just a front for their fear of gay people or, for the most vociferous advocates of homo hatred, a fear of their own latent and repressed sexuality.
Remember: a golden rule is that men who rail against sexual vice are often themselves hiding their own sexual “deviancy” from themselves and others. The more fanatic the crusade, the deeper the secret to be hidden.
Clint Eastwood is an old fashioned libertarian type of conservative, a rare and dying breed these days in the face of the totalitarian religious fanaticism which has gained such power among the right.
The Chase 
Mick said:
What’s with this Christian bias? I am sure that Jews and Muslims are also opposed.
zorroprimo said:
Somehow the prospect of Elton John marrying Liberace doesn’t seem to threaten my pursuit of happiness.
insideawomansmind said:
At the end of the day, discriminating against love is sad.
… Wow, I just sounded like a cutesy, candyfloss, pink-bow-in-the-hair kinda girl there, didn’t I? *shudders* Ah well, I’ll take one for the team this time.
davidcohensr said:
“but that is really most often just a front for their fear of gay people or, for the most vociferous advocates of homo hatred, a fear of their own latent and repressed sexuality.”
Please don’t turn logic on it’s head when discussing homosexuality in this context.
You wouldn’t say that a person who dislikes communists or feminist is secretly a communist or a feminist, or that they ‘have problems with their own political identity’, would you? How about libertarians – according to the logic being used, must they secretly want to be taxed and controlled more?
Of course not, and implying that they would would be illogical and would make the person saying it sound silly. However, once homosexuality is involved, logic goes out the window. Instead of accepting that some people are simply uncomfortable with the sexuality of others, it is implied that that person is uncomfortable with their own sexuality. It is more a way of killing the discussion than getting to the truth of the matter.
CL said:
What’s with this Christian bias? I am sure that Jews and Muslims are also opposed.
Buddhists too – real ones anyway. The Dalai Lama, darling of the left, called homosexuality “sexual misconduct”, which is pretty much the same stance as the Pope (I believe the word he would use is “disordered”). Where is the homosexual campaign against every other religion? Many Muslims still think they should be hanged and do hang them in Muslim majority countries.
It’s possible to believe that it’s disordered without hating homosexuals. Of course, let’s not forget all the straight people who engage in sodomy too, and fornication. These are no better from a doctrinal point of view. As for freedom, why should churches be forced to perform “gay” ceremonies? They have as much right to freedom of conscience as anyone else.
And if homosexuals are generally accepted in society and can have a civil union in most places, why the need to force their deviancy (for that is what it is – it is a deviation from the norm) on everyone else? Where is their respect? They sure do make a lot of noise for such a small minority.
Those Christians who crusade vociferously against homosexuals are also a minority; they just tend to be the loudest. No doubt some of those are battling their own inclinations though.
CL said:
You wouldn’t say that a person who dislikes communists or feminist is secretly a communist or a feminist, or that they ‘have problems with their own political identity’, would you?
This is true too. Alex Jones must secretly be shilling for the New World Order – he gets pretty worked up about that stuff!
Jean-Luc Legame said:
I agree with Clint here as well. The fight against gays is a total distraction from real issues.
Southern Man said:
I filter this sort of thing through these three rules:
(1) You are responsible for yourself and for any consequences of your actions.
(2) Your rights end where mine begin.
(3) What consenting adults do in private is no one’s business but theirs.
That makes me a conservative fundamentalist evangelical Christian that has no quarrel with gay marriage. Or polygamy. Or drug use at home. Or prostitution. Or erotica (obviously not, seeing that this blog is on my blogroll) or pornography. Just because I choose not to participate in certain activities does not give me the right to order YOU not to do them. I may, as your friend, try to convince you that something that you do or believe is wrong. I will not, as a voter, support laws that make what I think is wrong illegal.
Sadly, this is no longer the world in which we live. But I will do what I can to steer us in that direction whenever I am able.
Racer X said:
Mick,
Thanks for the comment. Yes, you are quite correct about other religions, especially Islam, being intolerant, but they do not have the political power in the U.S. that fundamentalist, evangelical Christians do, so I tend to focus on that.
II would add that in Islamic countries, or most countries for that matter outside the West, the hatred against homosexuality is far worse than here.
Racer X said:
Davidcohensrs,
“Please don’t turn logic on it’s head when discussing homosexuality in this context.”
Thanks for the comment. Well, I am really basing this statement on what I have seen in the world around me. Too often I have seen how men who rail against some sort of sexual advice are often secretly attracted to that vice. I don’t really apply that to other issues, such political ones, because I think the deeper motivations are different. The man who rails against porn usually does so because he finds it attractive, and therefore dangerous; he rails against communism because he finds it dangerous, and a threat to his freedom, and not at all attractive.
Just do a short history on all those who have been most vociferous in their animus against homosexuality or other sexual issues and you will find a lot of people who are actually homosexual themselves or find those same sexual issues alluring. Some even come to admit it, such as the Rev. Ted Haggard.
Just look at the hierarchy of the Catholic Church to see the most ridiculously closeted group of repressed and not so repressed gay men in the world. The scandals of the past decade that have come to light tend to confirm this. And yet the Church (i.e., the hierarchy, many of whom are themselves involved in homosexuality) is quite clear on the sinfulness of homosexual acts.
Racer X said:
CL,
“Where is the homosexual campaign against every other religion? Many Muslims still think they should be hanged and do hang them in Muslim majority countries.”
Yes, it is far worse for homosexuals in most other societies. Once again, the West proves itself superior to those other places. It is something worth defending.
I am a traditional jingoist. Despite our problems, the West is superior (yes…superior) to the rest of the world, and our laws and institutions support that claim. I make no bones about that. One of the main problems in the West is that we are so guilt ridden about our successes and historical conquests that we are afraid to any longer take pride in them. I say fuck that shit…the West is best. The rest of the world can live in ignorant, religious, traditionalist tribalism as far as I am concerned.
“As for freedom, why should churches be forced to perform “gay” ceremonies? ”
They should not be allowed to perform gay ceremonies. I am only advocating I don’t care if the civil society allows gays to marry, etc. Churches have the right to maintain their beliefs free from state coercions. Law should not be passed prohibiting gay people to marry if they want.
And CL…did you yourself not engage in such forms of “deviancy” in your youth…at least I hope so. I recall you alluding to this once. You know how hot I find that…if so, details, please. I love girls who are deviant.
Racer X said:
Jean-Luc and Southern Man,
Agreed.
Racer X said:
Inside,
“Ah well, I’ll take one for the team this time.”
Well, I would be most happy to give it to you for the team.
davidcohensr said:
“Thanks for the comment. Well, I am really basing this statement on what I have seen in the world around me. Too often I have seen how men who rail against some sort of sexual advice are often secretly attracted to that vice.”
I have only ever seen that on the TV with politicians, never in real-life. Which is strange when you think about it.
I don’t think we should be using those guys (politicians) as a basis for comparison for the average American – the politician will say one thing and do another consistently. The ‘do as I say, not as I do’ thing runs too strong with them to be compared to the average person.
But yeah, in my 76 years I never seen anyone against homos turn out to be gay IRL.
That seems to be something that happens to middle-aged American Male politicians. To compare them to Joe and Jill Americana, well makes it look like a bit of an apex fallacy.
*And let’s not forget the sociopathy. Many politicians have it, use it, know it and love it. To them sexuality is just another tool with which to acquire votes, and that makes it hard to infer some deeper meaning from their opinions on the matter.