The National Review, or rather the editors claim that we (gay folks) and our gay rights threatens the freedom of belief and conscience. I was lost on this concept and no matter how many times I read this article, I still don't get it. So my response may be off, but I have to rant about this idea.
How do we threaten the freedom of belief and conscience? The article points out this piece:
Churches oppose same-sex marriage in part because it represents an implicit threat to freedom of conscience and belief. California already had one of the broadest civil-unions laws in the country. There was little in the way of government-sanctioned privileges that a state-issued marriage license would confer. But the drive for same-sex marriage is in practice about legislating moral conformity — demanding that everybody recognize homosexual relationships in the same way, regardless of their own beliefs.
But does the religious right follow the same format? They are demanding we should not have the right to marry and demanding their beliefs to be followed by all. Churches stifles the freedom of belief. If you don't believe in their practice, you go to Hell. To believe in something else than God is blasphemy. And to think outside of their Bible box means that you are a sinner or possessed. Their very existence threatens the freedom of belief and conscience if you ask me.
Because we want marriage will not change the ticking of the clock. No moral wall will fall and children will not go blind if we got Prop 8 overturned. Our wish for freedom and rights don't threaten anything. However the only thing it threatens is the foolish institution religion has been standing on for centuries.
via Pam's House Blend
4 comments:
Ugh! I get a stomach ache every time a piece of writing like this comes out sooth-saying the demise of life as we know it because gay people are infringing on this or that. It's ridiculous. The church has been allowed to condemn and "infringe" for centuries on whatever group they believed worthy, twisting an already mistranslated bible into support for anything from slavery to homophobia. The Bible is actually a more liberal-friendly book, so why do the conservatives have power over it?
Of course I agree with you. Christianity is not the only belief system around and nobody else force people to follow their path. I believed in santa when I was a kid and other kids in school tells me different but you don't see me beat everyone up just because they're telling me Santa doesn't exist.
Well, I disagree partly with what you said about Christian belief system; however, there is a clear contradiction in their notion of what those that are for marriage-equality.
Mainly because the government does a lot of things that an individual might oppose on religious or ethical grounds and we all accept it, because that is the role of government: to serve everyone not just a religious majority. Plus if a state legitimizes marriage-equality anyone could be able to oppose it, and no church would be forced to conduct a gay marriage, because that is a separate, which in the eyes of the law means nothing.
The struggle for marriage equality is not about forcing people to accept homosexuality--though that would be nice--it is a struggle to be treated fairly and equally under the law.
That snippet of the article is so full of contradiction it isn't even funny.
I truly do not see how any thinking person could honestly say that by not imposing their religious beliefs somehow we're guilty of threatening freedom.
While I fully support the freedom of religious beliefs, turning those beliefs into an institution and becoming pro-active in forcing people to comply is the real, and, ultimately, foolish threat.
Post a Comment