Articles

Hey Scott,

Accept yourself for who and what you are! Give 'GOD' a break!

To my knowledge it isn't illegal for two gay men... or two straight men to kiss in a mall. Outlawing gay marriage doesn't change this.

I'm pretty sure that any grand kids old enough to ask are old enough to understand that gay people exist.

Scott, may God bless you and hold you in the hollow of His hand.

The argument that parents need to protect their children from seeing a gay couple is just as culturally biased as needing to protect your children from seeing an interracial couple. It was only 8 years ago that Alabama officially removed the ban on interracial marriages from their laws. In a statewide referendum to amend the Alabama constitution, the elimination of the ban passed 59 percent to 41 percent. It was a moot point, because in 1967, the US Supreme Court, in much the same way the California Supreme Court acted this spring, declared anti-miscegenation laws unconstitutional. But, despite this, many in the evangelical Christian community still frowned on interracial relationships. At the conservative evangelical Bob Jones University, it wasn't until March 2000 that the school lifted a ban on interracial dating. In a previous case against Bob Jones University by the IRS, the university contented, "God intended segregation of the races and that the Scriptures forbid interracial marriage." What's shocking about these two cases, is that they're both from within the past decade. While the struggle for equality among gay, bisexual, lesbian, and transgender people is building, the struggle for the same rights in the African American community still persists over 40 years after the landmark Supreme Court ruling in Loving v. Virginia. What's even more shocking is that 41 percent of Alabamians -- a state with one of the highest percentages of church attendance -- still feel that interracial marriages are sinful.

And, as others stated, banning same-sex marriages will do nothing to ban same-sex relationships. Unless, of course, you'd like to revive the indecency laws and include same-sex affection as part of that tome of bias. Why is it so difficult for you to allow gay and lesbian people to engage in lifelong committed relationships that conform to all of the same public modesty as a heterosexual relationship? How is not allowing that couple to enjoy the same legal protection from the State of California infringing on your rights? Or, do you want to make it illegal for me to hold my boyfriend's hand or offer a modest kiss in much the same way that any loving person might do in a public place? Regardless of the laws of California, I still intend to marry in a Church. Does withholding the legal protection of marriage help anyone? It won't deter me from being a loving committed spouse. Do you have to explain why a black and white person are affectionate to your children? How is this different for any pair of caring adults?

We can go into the scriptural context of relationship, but I challenge you to find a verse in the Bible that defines what a marriage is. And, "God created them male and female" is not a complete definition. It's a statement of fact. God also created them naked. He created them as vegetarians. He created them as adults. So, does that mean anyone born as a child, who wears clothes, and eats meat cannot marry? I know I'm exaggerating here. I'm making a point. We need to look at scripture as a whole. All of the text points to this ongoing relationship between God and humankind. And, as part of this love story of sin and law and grace and forgiveness, we learn about ourselves, about our God, and about how we should relate to one another. Anyone can take a single verse out of context and build a biased theology on it. It has happened countless times and it continues to happen. And, humility must dictate that there are millions of Christians who have differing opinions on same-sex relationships. The fact that this has become the "number two" issue to Christians in America demonstrates the length at which Christians can be politically manipulated. Jesus never talked about sexual orientation. Paul only mentions it in conjunction with temple worship and pedasty. The only isolated condemnation of it is in Leviticus. But, if you go down that route, you'll have to kill your kids if they talk back to you. And forget about pork or shrimp. And, for goodness sake, don't wear cotton-polyester blends.

and sometimes informative.

Well....... that's mighty generous of you to say!

Dear Corrupt_Politician,

Did I read that right and you stated that AIDS is a gay disease? How then is the greatest infection/spread rate among heterosexual males and in the african american heterosexual community? Just curious...

rockbadger- No, you didn't read it correctly. I reposted a hateful post whprsnpr made in another thread. Those were his words.

I would never post something so ignorant and hateful.

Dear Corrupt_Politicians,
I went back and reread the post. I understand it wasn't you. Apologies. It is too bad there are other minds like that out there.

whspr - not correct!
Both agreed that Civil Unions should be allowed.
Joe Biden said: Obama and myself do not want to change the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman BUT
IT SHOULD BE LEFT TO EACH RELIGION WHAT UNIONS THEY WISH TO BLESS! He did not condemn gay marriage! He left it to the Constitutional right of freedom of religion. I have not heard anyone in the media pick up on this. If the Episcopal Church or any church, wants to bless gay marriages the blood shed by the forefathers will protect this right and no one can stop them.

Bryan,

I'm sorry I didn't reply sooner. I was up until 4:15 a.m. working on the new server, and today was a blur of chores, driving to meet our pastor, and fixing more minor things on the site after the upgrade. But, I do think it's import to have this dialog.

First, let me stress, that I'm not attacking you, per se. I wholeheartedly disagree with some of your assumptions and idea. But, I respect you as a person for standing by your convictions. And, please don't take my long replies as anger or frustration. I like to write. I like to be clear and to allow little room for unintentional ambiguity.

At one point in my life I was far more socially conservative like you. But, it took a long hard look in the mirror for me to realize that this world wasn't only made for the Scott Straley's, but for everyone who strives to be part of society. I am constitutionally conservative, however. I feel that it is not the role of government to legislate "morality", except in the case of social justice, for the protection against victimization by crime, and for preserving the well-being of the population. Simply being offended by someone's dress, national origin, culture, etc. is not enough to prohibit their participation in our society. Also, part of the body of laws our government is within its right in enacting are laws that protect the well-being of the population and reduce unnecessary burdens on society. So, seatbelt laws, speed limits, food standards, building codes, etc. all fall within that level of greater good.

This perspective, in my humble opinion, is one of the few layers of protection that prevents the "morality police" in our culture from Talibanizing our culture.

I do find it interesting that you don't espouse a particular faith-perspective (according to your earlier posts) on your lack of acceptance of same-sex civil rights. I would love to hear about the origin of these convictions within the context of your world view. I would assume that is its purely cultural. But, my sister, whom I imagine is within your age-range and my parents, who were a couple decades older than you, held a vastly different world view and level of tolerance.

However, regardless of the origin of your views, you must admit that the social acceptance of gay and lesbian people gradually increased through the 80s and 90s, and within the past decade, has seen tremendous growth -- so much so that most people see it as inevitable that equal rights will be fully extended to gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people within the next decade or so. And, it is a shame that some people, who hold onto anachronistic views, are not only delaying the process, but also are being faced with an increased level of frustration. While public support of same-sex relationships have grown, also has the number of hate crimes against gay and lesbian people. Between 2006 and 2007, the last year that complete statistics were available, hate crimes against gay, lesbian, transgender, and bisexual people increased 24% (http://www.hatecrimesbill.org/2008/05/24-increase-ant.html).

I wonder how you feel about violent responses by people against gay or lesbian people.

Regards,
Scott

...State Senate Bill 420...

Let me start this with, I am not Christian. I was raised by a Jewish Mother and Catholic Father. I respect all religions and a person's right to choose their life partner. My frustration is that the law and religion is getting involved with who a person chooses to marry. I am not gay, I am happily married to a wonderful man. Although, I have been involved with acting and showing dogs since I was 12. I know many gays and have been told the same thing over and over, it is not a choice. They all have known since they were young that they had a same sex attraction. Why can't we all stay out of this? How can it personally hurt you if gays get married? Will you all get "cooties" if you meet a gay married couple? Grow up people and fight for something that will truly make a difference in this world.

Our economy is a wreck, people are killing each other for stupid things, our kids are failing school, we are spending $10 billion a month in a war that is a waste of time. Gay marriage is the least of our problems!!!

Heidi

The ONLY thing that is constant in this world is CHANGE. We All must roll with the flow and get our 'Straight' or 'Gay' heads out of the sand!

whprsnpr,

There are over 1,000 rights that heterosexual couples enjoy that same-sex couples cannot: tax benefits, survivorship, inheritance, medical decisions, legal proceedings, etc. Now, most of these are federal rights, and this vote will not change that. But, for those rights specific to the state of California, this proposition eliminates those rights.

You brought up your revulsion to obscene displays at gay pride parades. And, I agree with you. Any public sexual display or excessive displays of affection are inappropriate -- regardless of orientation or gender. If I were to say that I think Paris Hilton is exceedingly hedonistic, and since she's heterosexual, that all straight people are disgusting, then you'd say I'm overgeneralizing. Don't overgeneralize the gay community.

And, since you seem to be at a loss of words in explaining things to your grand kids -- and probably, they're more aware and accepting of the world around them than you -- I'll give you some advice. You explain same-sex marriages the same way you explain opposite-sex marriages. You do it honestly. Without lies. 40 years ago, people expressed the exact same fears in trying to explain to their children about interracial couples. They said it was disgusting. They said it would open the door for bestiality. It was a slippery slope.

The same hate-filled charactatures are being levied against gay and lesbian people, who simply want the right to have a legally recognized lifelong monogamous relationship with the person they love.

And, as for the protest of the GLSE day at Rim High School. Well, the parents that did that would probably have been the same parents who protested when blacks were integrated into white schools. People who are small-minded and hate-filled, will always be small-minded and hate-filled. And, if they think God told them to hate, it makes it all the easier.

~ Scott

When the final tally is made and you are relinquishing your earthly hold on this plane, you will be happy that you fought for EVERYONE here on this planet, not just those that fit your narrow picture of what humans SHOULD be.

Lenny Bruce: "What should be is a dirty lie. There is only what is."

We have much bigger things to think about folks, like Heidi said. Those focusing on this should be ashamed, no matter how much Bible-fueled firepower and/or like-minded bigots they have behind them. It is beneath any cognizant, well-rounded human being to continue this destructive battle while lives are being lost.

WAKE UP!!

Marriage is supposed to be about two people who love each other. Period. Not about two people who love each other that can also create a baby. That's the difference between traditional and gay marriage. And that's the only difference. I am voting NO on Proposition 8 and hope that many more join me. That $154 Million will feed a lot of people.

i am sorry, the bible stated that a man and a woman participate in the act of marriage. not adam and steve, adela and eva, etc. the problem with this is that the whole idea of marriage the real meaning is being distorted - let people make their own choices - but do not put this in the teaching of our grandchildren the person who wants to do this is SICK AND THESE SWEET LITTLE CHILDREN DO NOT NEED THIS SHIT OR the gays ideas thrown down their throat they are innocent, they will grow up and see how corrupt and evil the world is on their own not with the crap throwm in their faces. what happened to traditional values? what happened tomarriage? DIVORCE IS EVERYWHERE dont get me started