Jitters Caffeine said:
I was raised in the Church, so you really need to watch your mouth. I never said I had anything against any religion, you're just assuming I do because I think it's wrong to discriminate against people because they're different. And I'm not ASSUMING that discrimination against a group of people is Bigotry, I'm outright saying it. Based on the fact that the definition is intolerance based on personal prejudices towards another group of people. You're basically saying gay people shouldn't exist, and just because other bigots like to get together and talk about how much they hate a particular group of people doesn't make them right. It just makes them a higher concentration of hateful people.
My apologies for my ill-judged jab; it applies well to ~70% of Escapistgoers. Nonetheless, the principle remains the same - it is an attempt to saddle one's opposition with negative terminology and judicial bias, just as the terms "homophobe" and "bigot" are.
What I am saying is very simple: You can believe whatever you want, do whatever you want, as long as you don't make me believe it or respect your actions. I should not have to support your position, or refrain from stating mine, in the public sphere. [http://catholicexchange.com/canada-orders-pastor-to-renounce-his-faith/] I should not be barred from adopting children because they might grow up to believe as I do. [http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-derbyshire-12598896] I should not have to cater a wedding I disagree with. You may disagree with me, but you may not ban me from discourse or make my beliefs hate speech - not before
proving that they are wrong. Until that point - while homosexuality is still undecided as to its very nature, whether it is intrinsic or extrinsic - attempting to enforce your view of the issue is tantamount to tyranny. That is all.
Pearwood said:
Right. They just want same-sex couples to never have the same legal rights married couples have. Not at all discriminatory. Argue your case all you want but don't bother trying to pretend it isn't rooted in homophobia, your argument is saying gay people don't deserve the same legal rights. If we were living in some kind of alternate universe where marriage was a purely religious ceremony and didn't confer any kind of legal status then we could discuss this properly without there being any homophobia or accusations of homophobia but that's not the case.
You are beginning from the invalid postulate that homosexuality is similar in classification to race or gender - that it is inborn, impossible to alter. As long as your arguments rest on postulates that are not accepted by both sides, no conversation may take place.
At this point, I have said my piece, outlined my positions. I'm not moving from them. Good day to y'all.