I think the problem with homosexuality is that those preaching tolerance, and those preaching morals (and claiming it stands against good moral principle) are playing different games, to use a metaphor.
To start from the beginning, and I'm talking about Marriage Equality here, is that what we're all playing for here is bigger than homosexuals, and the homosexual community. What the arrangement is, is that there isn't a reason we ought to tell two consenting adults what they can or cannot do if it doesn't affect anyone else.
Beyond this, we should create laws that discriminate Group A's contract from Group B's. This isn't just my opinion, here in America this happens to be law. And not just one session of Congress. Because it was an Amendment to the Constitution, both chambers of Congress, the Executive, and 3/4ths of the then 39 states (at least) said "yes, we're not going to say any law is good for one person, but not another."
There may be a few that see my clinical, legalistic approach as a little too callous and dehumanized, but this is what I meant by "two different games."
When you opt for a non-reasonable, non-logical approach, more specifically when you approach it on an emotional basis, you're going to find an unwinable argument. There isn't a opinions on the opposing side, its the word of those people's creator. That's fine as far as I'm concerned, but it does me the smarmy, liberal approach, which does more to trivialize the cause than promote it, needs to be tossed. Heres an example:
Who does this help, honestly? Aside from the 18-24 demographic who I'm sure thinks that's hilarious, I'm sure this turned off some people who are generally in favor of Marriage Equality. I don't mean they have turned against it because of this video, but I do think many who put their efforts into the struggle looked at that and thought it was in poor taste.
In the end, this is where the disparity is. The wing-nuts on the right aren't generally social conservatives. They tend to be libertarian and even if they were going to be snarky about this issue, it wouldn't be in opposition. If you're going to change hearts and minds on this issue, you're going to need to be more reasonable. We're not going to convince anyone who thinks God is against Gay Marriage to embrace it, but the rational argument that the law is the law, not for when we agree on something but for when we don't, can change the minds of those who are willing to be reasonable. There are still too many baby-boomers, Reagan Democrats who were raised in Immigrant homes but can see the logic that are still voting against it because of the trivial nature of some arguments.
We need to treat this inequality with the gravity is should be given. If this were segregation, or women's suffrage, I doubt we'd be making the same sort of ridiculous - pointless - videos.
And this, for what my opinion is worth - is the problem with homosexuality.
|