![]() |
|
Welcome to the InterfaithForums forums. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions, articles and access our other FREE features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact support. |
|
|||||||
| General Debate Debate any subject. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
||||
|
First of all, "The Gay Agenda" is not a term used by gays anywhere, nor particularly by those liberal types who happen to think that gay is just another way to be. The term "Gay Agenda" is primarily, almost exclusively, used by social conservatives in the United States (note, not much used in other western countries), and they perceive it to be a secret attempt to try and make homosexuality acceptable, when every good Christian knows God hates it. They believe that gays are trying to effect equality, in part for the purposes of recruiting children to be "the next generation" of gays, though media exposure and broad cultural change. The term, when it is used, typically has a pejorative association, and also causes some level of fear in the primarily Christian right.
For most gays, and for many others who think that the goal of equal rights is perfectly acceptable, the term "gay agenda" is quite offensive, and it is often used in a sarcastic way precisely in order to be offensive. For gays, however, there most assuredly is a movement in place since the late 1960s ("After Stonewall"). That movement is aimed at ending discrimination against gays in housing, employment and public accommodations and achieving equality for persons whose sexual orientation is different. In general, we would prefer churches not to denounce us from the pulpit, any more than they should be able to denounce women, blacks, asians or people who like rock music. We would like hate-crime legislation to include gays, which is mostly not the case now. We would like to opportunity to marry our life partners, and to participate in the 1049 particular benefits that the married state confers in the U.S., including all legal property rights and responsibilities, inheritance rights in the absence of a legal will, the right to speak for an incapacitated spouse, the right to claim our spouses as dependents and all of the tax and legal ramifications that go with that, the right to raise our children (yes, we have them) together in loving families (yes, we have them, too), and in short, to enjoy the same sort of married life in public as everyone else enjoys. I'm happy to say that in Canada, where I live, most of that we now have. For whatever reason, Canada and much of Europe seem to be able to cope with these sorts of things much better than some rightwing Americans, who are pretty sure that a loving and compassionate God is standing ready to smite them at any moment, for the slightest infraction. I've never been able to figure that out, personally.
__________________
evangelicalhumanist: Greek "eu"=good and "angelos"=messenger. Spreading the good news of Humanism. |
|
||||
|
Good description EH!
__________________
RevKathyV http://www.myspace.com/divinelightinterfaith www.divinelightinterfaithministry.com |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|