How to Keep it Classy (This is Sincere)

Related Post Roulette

10 Responses

  1. Avatar Mike Schilling
    Ignored
    says:

    If you lend a man your coat, he’s warm for a day.

    If he sets himself on fire, he’s warm for the rest of his life.Report

  2. Avatar rea
    Ignored
    says:

    “appropriate accommodations and exemptions for institutions and individuals who abide by religious teachings that limit their ability to support same-sex relationships?”

    Is not particularly classy–it’s a call for open discrimination.Report

    • Avatar Morat20 in reply to rea
      Ignored
      says:

      Well, it can be read two ways.

      Unfortunately, a lot of people using that line have made be cynical — which means I translate it out to “I don’t want to be unpopular because I’m against this. That’s discrimination!” which is hilarious, very American, and frankly an audacious refuge for bigots.

      It’s entirely possible they’re just worried about the “They might make us churches marry the gays or accept them!” which would be….really against the entire history of the way religions have been handled, and you’d think would be easy to stop worrying about just by taking a quick gander at the Catholic Church, which does…not have to marry anyone who doesn’t meet their criteria.

      Lastly, there’s the growing strain of “I should be allowed to make you do stuff according to my faith or else it’s discrimination” movement.

      I’d give these folks the benefit of the doubt, myself.Report

      • Avatar Mike Schilling in reply to Morat20
        Ignored
        says:

        I agree. “Limit their ability to support same-sex relationships” aren’t exactly fighting words.Report

        • Avatar Morat20 in reply to Mike Schilling
          Ignored
          says:

          Just as a devil’s advocate — some of the nastiest stuff in the world has been summed up in bland, non-threatening prose. There’s an entire industry around it — starting with con men and ending with PR flacks.

          Whether it’s dog whistles or just legalese, you can pack a lot of ‘wrong’ into a short, seemingly innocuous sentence.

          It honestly depends on what they mean behind that sentence. Are they basically saying “Yeah, but we don’t have to marry them” or are they saying “We don’t have to treat them as married?”. I tend to give them the benefit of the doubt and think they mean the former.

          But just as an example: There are plenty of Catholic hospitals, yes? The Catholic Church is under no obligation to perform a marriage between two men. But their hospital darn well SHOULD be under an obligation to allow a spouse to visit. One could make “accommodations and exemptions for institutions and individuals who abide by religious teachings that limit their ability to support same-sex relationships?” cover both.

          One is objectionable, one is not.Report

  3. Avatar Damon
    Ignored
    says:

    “Lastly, there’s the growing strain of “I should be allowed to make you do stuff according to my faith or beliefs or political agenda or else it’s discrimination” movement”

    Fixed that for ya.

    @morat20Report

  4. Avatar Richards
    Ignored
    says:

    I think it boils down to the fear that the discriminators (who until now had pretty much carte blanche to do so openly) are worried they will be the discriminated… to which I would ike to say, reap and ye shall sow….Report

  5. Avatar Geoff Arnold
    Ignored
    says:

    The contrast between this and Rod Dreher’s jeremiad is striking.Report

  6. Avatar zic
    Ignored
    says:

    I will give this response some respect; at least it acknowledges that there is and has been discrimination against gay people by religious people. That’s some progress.

    I wonder about the venn diagram of 1) people who worry about getting fired because they think gay marriage is a sin and want to maintain the right to discriminate against gay people and 2) people who support ‘right to work’ laws, meaning the employer has the right to fire you without question.Report

    • Avatar Morat20 in reply to zic
      Ignored
      says:

      Honestly, just reading what some of the people I know (the Facebook reaction against gay marriage, even from my more conservative relatives, has been VERY muted compared to the ACA ruling. Then again, 37/50 states were already marrying gays and it quickly becomes clear that gay marriage doesn’t impact anyone but….gay people who want to get married.)

      Anyways, people I know — and this isn’t just now in light of the ruling but over the last ten years or so — I get the impression that what the (anti-gay doesn’t sound quite right. But..not in favor of gay marriage) has been more like…..

      They want to be able to say gays are icky, and not get judged. That’s their beef. That’s what gets them upset. They don’t want to be called homophobes or bigots because two guys kissing makes them think “ewww”.

      That’s like this large proportion of them. It’s not religious, it’s not really anything but “My whole life, leading until now, has had me culturally conditioned to find that weird and wrong and screwed up SOMEHOW so can I please not see it? And also don’t do that in front of me so I don’t have to see it”.

      And to them, getting called “bigot” is upsetting. They’ve really got no problems with gays, in their heads, they just don’t want to see them. They don’t see that as bigotry (even though, if you take a step back, it clearly IS. It’s like saying you don’t have a problem with black people, it’s just you’d prefer not to see them. Or hear them. Or have them hanging around, being black, right in your face). They often talk about gays ‘flaunting’ their homosexuality and ‘forcing’ people to see it (ie: gay people just living lives exactly as heterosexuals do. Talking about their loved ones, holding hands, going on dates, chatting, existing).

      So I’m thinking what’s lurking down there, in a lot of people who aren’t fully onbard the “WAHOO! ABOUT TIME!” train is this unhappy realization that the way they feel is going to get them judged negatively by a larger and larger percentage of the population. So they start muttering ‘persecution’ because it’s either that OR they’re actually bigots.

      And humans, being who we are, would much rather believe someone’s misjudging us (and therefore the problem lies with them) than to believer we’re bigoted, racist, sexist, or otherwise wrong.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *