Left this comment in response to a blog about why it’s just and good and wonderful to oppose other people having the same rights as you, and how people who support gay rights are “me” centered which is why they don’t understand the position of people who are “jesus” centered ::gag::
Anyway, here is my response:
Two things – one, we live in a democracy, not a theocracy. Which means you can’t outlaw something merely because it goes against your religious beliefs, you must also have a secular basis for the law. And two, even if you wish to make america a theocracy your position is still staggeringly hypocritical because you don’t outlaw divorce, trimming one’s facial hair, women having short hair or speaking in churches or hundreds of other things that are explicitly forbidden in the bible. To apply the bible’s edicts selectively (and usually when it impacts someone else’s life and not your own) while saying “how dare you not follow the bible” is the height of hypocrisy.
And it’s not about being “me” centered, if it were nobody but gay people would support gay marriage. It’s about being a human being and having a capacity for empathy which allows you to not be “me” centered but to instead imagine yourself in someone else’s position and care about not just you you you and only concern yourself with things you personally have gone through or are going through. The people who support gay rights (including the over 1,100 rights and benefits denied to gay couples which straight couples enjoy) are supporting it out of a sense of fairness and compassion, out of a sense of “do unto others what you would have them do unto you”. And the people who oppose gay rights are doing so out of a misguided and hypocritical sense of duty, or just bigotry in many cases.
This is another layer of the hypocrisy of your position, there is literally nothing a straight couple can do that is so horrible their right to marry is ever taken away. I could beat my wife, murder her, rape our children, get remarried and divorced a hundred times, committing adultery each time and nobody would even suggest that my right to marry should be taken away. I could get married to someone I met five minutes before while intoxicated and nobody would suggest that this is a “threat” to their marriage. I could get married by an elvis impersonator in a drive-through wedding chapel to someone I don’t even like just for the tax write-off, and nobody is ever going to suggest that you need to be “protected” from my actions that don’t even affect you.
But two gay people who love each other and want to make a lifelong monogamous commitment? Ammend the constitution immediately!
It’s like phrases like “illegal immigrant” and “anchor baby” only being used to vilify non-white immigrants. When is the last time you heard of a canadian who had a child while living in the US on a visa being accused of having an “anchor baby”?
Hypocrisy and bigotry. And in the name of jesus, that never gets old.