You're Not a Bigot If

you don't want this in public schools.

1.  During a celebration of National Ally Week, Tara Miller, a teacher at the Faith Ringgold School of Arts and Science in Hayward, Calif., passed out cards produced by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network to her class of kindergartners.

The cards asked signers to be "an ally" and to pledge to "not use anti-LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) language or slurs; intervene, when I feel I can, in situations where others are using anti-LGBT language or harassing other students and actively support safer schools efforts."

2.  A group of San Francisco first-graders took an unusual field trip to City Hall on Friday to toss rose petals on their just-married lesbian teacher - putting the public school children at the center of a fierce election battle over the fate of same-sex marriage.

But these things will happen if government continues to condone same-sex marriage because government entities must not make distinctions as long as that is the law.

And same-sex marriage isn't necessary to show humanity and compassion to homosexuals in hospital visitation and other arrangements for relationships because that is already state law before the court granted marriage rights earlier this year.

Same-sex marriage isn't necessary to be fair and affirming traditional marriage doesn't make you a bigot.

Comments

[Mike Westfall]

I wonder if they'll pass out cards for the kindergartners to sign pledging not to use slurs ("Homophobe!") against those who disagree with LGBT ideals?

[Karen A.]

Thanks to STR for informing me about Family Code 297.5 in which CA state law says that same-sex couples can't be denied any of the rights and privileges of married couples.

Sunday I talked with two NO on PROP 8 activists who were standing on a busy corner with a bullhorn. My simple question was "What legal right would Prop 8 take away?"

The straight man resisted admitting that they just wanted the name "marriage" because he couldn't come up with a right other than being with the one you love. (Also, after first saying he was against polygamy, he finally had to admit the logic of having to support it.)

The gay man got involved, but could only come up with having to claim his own portion of his partner's health insurance coverage as income, and his not having power to make end of life decisions for his partner. When I pointed out that he had those rights already in FC297.5, and that he should do something about being discriminated against (sue?), he got very frustrated and told me I was mistakenly reading the law at face value. He turned away with a drippingly sarcastic comment.

The saddest part was that the straight man's 8 or 9 yr old son was standing there listening, trying to argue points, and getting visibly upset.

[David]

In the Los Angeles area, I ran across some people with "No on Prop 8 - it's UNFAIR" signs. (Prop 8 would define marriage as between one man and one woman).

I asked them what they feel is unfair about Prop 8. One answer was, "They want to take away our rights." Another said, "Two people who want to marry should be able to legally do so."

I, very casually and sincerely, asked, "So any two people who want to marry should be able to do so?" "Yes. Of course," was their answer.

I asked if two siblings desire to marry, would they support their right to do so? One man, politely said, "That's NOT the issue here. We're talking about "Prop 8."

I said, "I'm just asking about your 'UNFAIR' proclamation on your sign. Would you support siblings who want to marry?"

He said, "I'm against that happening." I asked, "Wouldn't it be unfair to not allow them to marry, if they so desire?"

He answered, "You're trying to find out if I'm a moral person. I am. I am NOT in favor of siblings marrying."

"But it seems that if they want to marry, wouldn't it be unfair to deny them?"

It really went no further.

Remembering STR's instruction to be friendly and cordial, I extended my hand in appreciation and thanked them for their time. They seemed a bit surprised but shook my hand. I think it was healthy interaction. (Thank you, STR, for encouraging communication and interaction. That's the first time I've attempted it in a public setting).

I don't believe we're taking rights away. We are NOT bigots for desiring to live in a country where marriage is between ONE man and ONE woman.

[john umland]

Number 1 sounds like the golden rule. I can support that.
God is good
jpu

[David Blain]

A question to those who read this blog:

I had a conversation with a non-Christian friend who is against Prop 8. We have had many discussions about this topic but I have never raised any religious arguments against homosexuality. He then presented me with an argument a Christian, who was against Prop 8, told him. It went something like this: God is the judge of right and wrong and the Bible teaches man to love his neighbors (which was implying do not judge neighbors because that is somehow unloving!) Therefore, people should be able to marry the same sex because it is up to God to judge their actions.

I gave a response off the top of my head that was enough for my friend to think about and I also have generated some other thoughts to the argument that I think soundly refute it.

Anyways, let me know what you guys think a good response would be.

[Brad B]

Hi David, check in to see how deadly the homosexual lifestyle is, the statistics bear this out. Not only in length of life, but quality of life. So which is more loving, to approve and endorse it or to argue against it?

Brad B

[Anon]

Karen A.
This question may have already been answered, but does Prop. 8 take away any federal (not state) rights/ protections that are not guaranteed by Family Code 297.5? For instance, would Prop 8 prevent gay couples from getting certain federal tax breaks that straight couples get?

[Amy Parrott]

In reference to the friend's argument that one should love their neighbor and therefore not judge...the bible doesn't say that we should not judge, it says do not judge unless you, yourself are ready to be judged also.

[westminsterabs]

Regarding David's friend's confusion about "judging" (and Amy's helpful comment) --

There's much to be said (and that GK, for one, has said) about the issue of judgment. Certainly only God judges souls. It is quite conceivable that a person could rightly note the immorality of some action by another person, yet himself be the less righteoous person in God's eyes.

It is also clear, though, that much of our ordinary experience -- and much of what we're told in Scripture -- would make no sense if we were not able or expected to judge actions (just as people do when they tell other people not to judge...)

If someone disputes this, note that the Lord Himself said to "judge with righteous judgment."

Here it is with some context:
(John 7:23-24, NKJV) "If a man receives circumcision on the Sabbath, so that the law of Moses should not be broken, are you angry with Me because I made a man completely well on the Sabbath? Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

Another thought, on the same theme:

The demand by homosexual activists that same-sex relationships be called "marriages" provides further refutation of the claim that they do not want to be judged. Actually, they demand that we judge them -- favorably.

[westminsterabs]

"righteoous"? That was a typoo.

[Proudfather of gayteen]

Its so sad that america is so full of Christian Fundamentalist hate mongers