Threatened With Extinction, Conservative Opinions on Marriage Begin to Evolve

Dec 28, 2013 Full story: EDGE 56

There's no question that 2013 was a landmark year for LGBT rights in America. Along with the two Supreme Court decisions that legalized marriage on the federal level, there was a development that, in the long view of history, may prove to have been just as historic: capitulation by conservative forces that have fought just as long and at least as ... (more)

Full Story
hi hi

Lancaster, PA

#21 Dec 29, 2013
Christaliban wrote:
I dislike this premise because it could be construed to mean that right wingers are becoming okay. They aren't. And Portman is an especially vile example - only when _his_ family member wanted equal rights did he change. He was blind to all those other people. They didn't count, or even exist in his mind.
I love that you made this comment. I couldn't agree more, and I often stay silent about things like this.

Human nature dictates that people change when something directly affects them. However, I can never shake, lifelong, a notion that this makes us all little more than the blind animals that we all so essentially seem to be.

It is so searingly, especially noble when someone does something out of a sense of goodness, not because they were personally affected. I know it's rare; I will not quarrel with human nature but I will always privately feel it makes us ... not very noble, as a species, at all. Not very noble at all.(Some may argue that this response to you represents me quarreling with human nature; they are missing my tone and my intent, flat-out.)

So many antigay persons become pro-gay directly after a family member makes them see differently, and better. It's great and all, but -- exactly like you -- I don't find it the slightest bit rousing or laudatory, and I won't pretend that I do. I won't knock it (except insofar as I'm forced to use words, here, to explain my position), but neither will I laud it. This is much more a private feeling and a personal disappointment than a criticism of those people, frankly.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#22 Dec 29, 2013
Rick in Kansas wrote:
<quoted text>Young people today, even among those who are brought up to be socially conservative, are far more likely to have grown up with someone who who has come out, or to know someone who is openly gay than those as recent as a decade ago. The people they know don't usually fit any of the right's stereotypes. someone having a firm grasp of the reality of the world around them can even temper religious indoctrination.They are bright enough to realize that this really is a civil rights issue. You're losing the battle for the hearts, minds and votes of young folk, even among otherwise conservative young folk. You onlu have yourselves to blame.
Lots of young people become convinced that their elders arre wrong and believe that lifestyles they were warned against are not destructive. They look at their 20-something friends and think all is well. As they and their friend approach 30 they start to see the fall-out from bad choices and often times realize that their elders were right.

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#23 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
Lots of young people become convinced that their elders arre wrong and believe that lifestyles they were warned against are not destructive. They look at their 20-something friends and think all is well. As they and their friend approach 30 they start to see the fall-out from bad choices and often times realize that their elders were right.
It's not our fault that you can't get your young folk to wear the blinders you want them too. You only see homosexuals buckling under the pressure that can come with the gift of being this way and on some sort of death spiral. Your kids are getting to know gay folk who are just as happy, healthy and sane as anybody else, they know those who want marriage and maybe even a family, those who have served their country and those attacked for no other reason than being different. They know that those of us buckling under the pressure don't need your pressure or your damnation. They're convinced you're wrong because you are and always will be as long as you keep your blinders on to the rest of us.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#24 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of young people become convinced that their elders arre wrong and believe that lifestyles they were warned against are not destructive. They look at their 20-something friends and think all is well. As they and their friend approach 30 they start to see the fall-out from bad choices and often times realize that their elders were right.
Again, the problem with your analysis is that the evidence doesn't support it, at least with regard to the public's acceptance of homosexuality in general, or of civil marriage for same-sex couples in particular.

In all age groups, and across just about all demographics, the evidence is clear that people are starting to see that being gay is not "the fall-out from bad choices", and they are coming to realize that their elders were very wrong. The biggest reason that they are coming to this realization is that a larger proportion of the population acknowledges knowing gay people, and that their personal knowledge of gay people conflicts with the false perceptions of homosexuality and gay people handed down to them from previous generations.

There will always be stubbornly and willfully ignorant people like you. Fortunately, your numbers and opinions will just be further marginalized and insignificant as time goes by.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#25 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of young people become convinced that their elders arre wrong and believe that lifestyles they were warned against are not destructive. They look at their 20-something friends and think all is well. As they and their friend approach 30 they start to see the fall-out from bad choices and often times realize that their elders were right.
Gee, and yet all the stats say you're wrong about that, which is why people only become MORE supportive of gays & lesbians and same-sex marriage in particular as they get older. That includes teens to seniors.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#26 Dec 29, 2013
I was very accepting of gays doing whatever in my 20s, and then AIDS came along, Nobody saw that coming, I am still accepting of gays now, I have gay friends, I just believe that marriage is a man and a woman. I also know in my ripe old age that all actions have consequences, most of them unintended, And I also know that all people gay or straight can be hurt by "whatever."

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#27 Dec 29, 2013
hi hi wrote:
<quoted text>
I love that you made this comment. I couldn't agree more, and I often stay silent about things like this.
Human nature dictates that people change when something directly affects them. However, I can never shake, lifelong, a notion that this makes us all little more than the blind animals that we all so essentially seem to be.
It is so searingly, especially noble when someone does something out of a sense of goodness, not because they were personally affected. I know it's rare; I will not quarrel with human nature but I will always privately feel it makes us ... not very noble, as a species, at all. Not very noble at all.(Some may argue that this response to you represents me quarreling with human nature; they are missing my tone and my intent, flat-out.)
So many antigay persons become pro-gay directly after a family member makes them see differently, and better. It's great and all, but -- exactly like you -- I don't find it the slightest bit rousing or laudatory, and I won't pretend that I do. I won't knock it (except insofar as I'm forced to use words, here, to explain my position), but neither will I laud it. This is much more a private feeling and a personal disappointment than a criticism of those people, frankly.
Kohlberg 6s are rare.

Since: Feb 10

Woodstock, Illinois

#28 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
I was very accepting of gays doing whatever in my 20s, and then AIDS came along, Nobody saw that coming, I am still accepting of gays now, I have gay friends, I just believe that marriage is a man and a woman. I also know in my ripe old age that all actions have consequences, most of them unintended, And I also know that all people gay or straight can be hurt by "whatever."
Were one of your gay friends to invite you to their wedding, would you accept the invite to support them on that important day?
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#30 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
Lots of young people become convinced that their elders arre wrong and believe that lifestyles they were warned against are not destructive. They look at their 20-something friends and think all is well. As they and their friend approach 30 they start to see the fall-out from bad choices and often times realize that their elders were right.
That load is all contrary to evidence. Younger people are not becoming homophobic again as they age - instead the homophobes are dying off from the US population.

The data could not be more clear.

But that's not good enough fer jeesus beluvers. They don't do data or rationality.
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#31 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
I was very accepting of gays doing whatever in my 20s, and then AIDS came along, Nobody saw that coming, I am still accepting of gays now, I have gay friends, I just believe that marriage is a man and a woman. I also know in my ripe old age that all actions have consequences, most of them unintended, And I also know that all people gay or straight can be hurt by "whatever."
You're a disgusting, homophobic bigot, and by your claim that you are not now we know you always were. We merely know you find myriad ways to excuse your problem of anti glbt bigotry.

And "some of your best friends" are not glbt people. They are either imaginary people, or they are not your friends, or they are confused closet cases meekly trying to get along as they can in some fundie ladden community or something.

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#32 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
I was very accepting of gays doing whatever in my 20s, and then AIDS came along, Nobody saw that coming, I am still accepting of gays now, I have gay friends, I just believe that marriage is a man and a woman. I also know in my ripe old age that all actions have consequences, most of them unintended, And I also know that all people gay or straight can be hurt by "whatever."
I certainly hope that you don't subscribe to the completely baseless notion that gay people qua gay people caused HIV or AIDS. That's simply false.

What doesn't make sense from your position is the apparent belief implied by your argument that one consequence of allowing civil marriage to same-sex couples is a rise in or continuance of high rates of HIV. That somehow the best way to encourage monogamy and discourage promiscuous sexual behavior is to deny to same-sex couples the very social and legal support that you claim is a stabilizing force in society.

Your beliefs and your positions appear to be in direct contradiction. It would seem to me that if one were truly concerned about HIV or AIDS, and if one believed that promiscuous sexual activity plays a role in infection rates, then one would support a public policy that encourages monogamy and discourages promiscuity -- civil marriage.

Since: Mar 07

Rhoadesville, VA

#33 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
I was very accepting of gays doing whatever in my 20s, and then AIDS came along, Nobody saw that coming, I am still accepting of gays now, I have gay friends, I just believe that marriage is a man and a woman. I also know in my ripe old age that all actions have consequences, most of them unintended, And I also know that all people gay or straight can be hurt by "whatever."
Gay folks are no more likely to be hurt by legal marriage then any other couple, and their children are just as likely to benefit.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#34 Dec 29, 2013
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>
You're a disgusting, homophobic bigot, and by your claim that you are not now we know you always were. We merely know you find myriad ways to excuse your problem of anti glbt bigotry.
And "some of your best friends" are not glbt people. They are either imaginary people, or they are not your friends, or they are confused closet cases meekly trying to get along as they can in some fundie ladden community or something.
I never said "best friends."
Chance

Grove City, PA

#35 Dec 29, 2013
Ron431 wrote:
<quoted text>
Were one of your gay friends to invite you to their wedding, would you accept the invite to support them on that important day?
No.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#36 Dec 29, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
I certainly hope that you don't subscribe to the completely baseless notion that gay people qua gay people caused HIV or AIDS. That's simply false.
What doesn't make sense from your position is the apparent belief implied by your argument that one consequence of allowing civil marriage to same-sex couples is a rise in or continuance of high rates of HIV. That somehow the best way to encourage monogamy and discourage promiscuous sexual behavior is to deny to same-sex couples the very social and legal support that you claim is a stabilizing force in society.
Your beliefs and your positions appear to be in direct contradiction. It would seem to me that if one were truly concerned about HIV or AIDS, and if one believed that promiscuous sexual activity plays a role in infection rates, then one would support a public policy that encourages monogamy and discourages promiscuity -- civil marriage.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetr... ;

"A study to be released next month is offering a rare glimpse inside gay relationships and reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many."

“Post-religious”

Since: Apr 08

Location hidden

#37 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/29/us/29sfmetr... ;
"A study to be released next month is offering a rare glimpse inside gay relationships and reveals that monogamy is not a central feature for many."
So what? How does this have any bearing at all on your position? As the article that you link to mentions, monogamy is not a central feature for many heterosexual marriages, as well. The rate of failure of first marriages for heterosexual couples alone would bear this out.

Is it your position that since some percentage of marriages aren't monogamous, civil marriages shouldn't be available to any couple -- same- or opposite-sex? Or that only same-sex couples should be denied civil marriage for this reason? How does that make any sense at all?
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#38 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said "best friends."
Everything I said still holds: You're a stupid bigot, the only "gay friends" you have are imaginary, not friends or are unfortunate products of the same talibangelical environs as you and are just trying to not get lynched by some xstain fatwa mob.

And people like you are already dinosaurs in educated society, objects of ridicule.
Chance

Grove City, PA

#39 Dec 29, 2013
Jerald wrote:
<quoted text>
So what? How does this have any bearing at all on your position? As the article that you link to mentions, monogamy is not a central feature for many heterosexual marriages, as well. The rate of failure of first marriages for heterosexual couples alone would bear this out.
Is it your position that since some percentage of marriages aren't monogamous, civil marriages shouldn't be available to any couple -- same- or opposite-sex? Or that only same-sex couples should be denied civil marriage for this reason? How does that make any sense at all?
Straight wedding vows almost always include "forsaking all others," and I believe most straights intend to be monogamous. Failure to do so is just that - failure. It is not an intentional lifestyle plan like it is with gays, To call an intentionally open same-sex couple "married" is a huge departure from the meaning of the word. It makes such a "marriage" a sham, which is why I wouldn't see such a wedding as a really important event. If gays want traditional marriage, then they should be willing to at least try to maintain the tradition. It doesn't seem ti be happening,
Chance

Grove City, PA

#40 Dec 29, 2013
Christaliban wrote:
<quoted text>
Everything I said still holds: You're a stupid bigot, the only "gay friends" you have are imaginary, not friends or are unfortunate products of the same talibangelical environs as you and are just trying to not get lynched by some xstain fatwa mob.
And people like you are already dinosaurs in educated society, objects of ridicule.
Why has it taken you so long to realize that your opinion of me matters not one tiny speck, Writewing?
Christaliban

Philadelphia, PA

#41 Dec 29, 2013
Chance wrote:
<quoted text>
Why has it taken you so long to realize that your opinion of me matters not one tiny speck, Writewing?
People like you need to demographically die; you're merely being held up for ridicule by educated persons.

Also, fundie scum, you avoided the point again, just like all you anti rational mullahs eventually wind up doing.

You don't have any gay friends, you never were tolerant or accepting of glbt people.

Jeebus will smote you for all your lying, bigotry and picking and choosing from scripture while ignoring most of it.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Wedding Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Homosexuality and the Bible (Aug '11) 1 hr blasterboy1984 29,075
GOP hopefuls weigh in on gay marriage 1 hr Cordwainer Trout 66
Same-Sex Marriage Trumps Religious Liberty in N... (Aug '13) 2 hr Not Yet Equal 981
Ben Carson Warns Gay Couples Against Pushing Ba... 4 hr Abrahammock Regions 39
Ill. House Approves Legalizing Same-Sex Civil U... (Dec '10) 4 hr KiMerde 51,359
Our recommendation: Springboro voters should sa... (Feb '08) 5 hr Waste Watchers 31,725
Man takes legal action after Denver baker refus... 6 hr Not Yet Equal 296
More from around the web