However, according to the MSM and many people on my FB feed, I'm anti-gay and homophobic.
I happen to support traditional marriage. My reasons are both secular and religious.
A liberal Facebook friend made the following comment after I defended my hometown newspaper for refusing to print same-sex marriage announcements, given that same-sex marriage is illegal in North Dakota:
The name-calling comment, by the way, is due to a previous commenter who had called me a "close-minded asshole."
Anyway, she's "never know me to be mean," yet apparently she thinks I'm close-minded and anti-gay - despite all evidence to the contrary! I don't suppose it's ever occurred to her to think for herself and come to the conclusion that I'm NOT anti-gay, and I find it appalling when people are mean, cruel, or violent toward those who identify as gay? (For example, I abhor the Westboro Baptist Church and all their disgusting acts of hatred.)
Here's the thing: it's possible to be opposed to a specific behavior or mindset without hating the person who commits that behavior or holds that mindset. For example, I have a relative, one I love very, very much, who committed adultery. I HATE that act of adultery. In fact, I despise it. But I still love my relative with all my heart and always will.
I don't hate gay people. I consider same-sex acts to be sinful, yes, and it makes me sad when people commit sin. However, I also recognize that people have free will and that includes the free will to commit sin, or to reject my beliefs and live as they please. But I am not bound to conform to their beliefs just as they are not bound to conform to mine, so I refuse to reject Truth in order to make people happy -- because ultimately tolerance is not a Christian virtue, and condoning what I believe to be sin would be a hateful act because I'd be showing utter disregard and contempt for that person's immortal soul.
The Anchoress said it better than I can:
I think all human beings have inherent worth, dignity, and value, regardless of their race, sex, sexual orientation, sexual behavior, or any other characteristic. Any unjust discrimination in their regard is to be avoided.The truth is, one can be a Christian and still be sympathetic to some parts of the so-called “gay agenda” without signing on in toto. One can disagree on the issue of gay marriage — based on scripture, or thousands of years of tradition, or on natural law — without actually hating anyone. But the right to principled opposition is being erased, quickly, and the press is doing all it can to help erase it. We are losing the right to say, “I don’t think the same way you do; my opinions are different.” That matters, a lot.
This is our mainstream press — the people charged with the public trust — and it has moved beyond advocacy and into “search and destroy” mode.
This is not about being “right” or “wrong” on an issue. This is about menacing and bullying people into conforming or paying the price. It’s about the bastardization of the word “tolerace” in our society, to the point where the word no longer means “live and let live” or “let people be who they are”; the word has become distorted in a very unhealthy way. Someone’s a bigot? Let him be a bigot; like it or not, a man is entitled to his damn bigotry. Someone’s a curmudgeon? Let him be a curmudgeon. Someone’s a misogynist (or, conversely, a male-hater?) let them be! People are entitled to be who they are — just as a church is entitled to be what it is — free of government compulsion to be what they are not. We cannot “make” people be more loving. We cannot “legislate” kindness. A bigot, or a hater (of any sort) will eventually find himself standing alone, will have to figure things out for himself. Or, not.
I don't support traditional marriage or oppose same-sex marriage because I hate gay people; I support traditional marriage and oppose same-sex marriage because traditional marriage is a cornerstone of society established for the purpose of raising children in a stable family unit. This definition has come under attack by no-fault divorce, contraception, and abortion; our culture has attempted for years to redefine it into nothing more then "two [or more] people [or buildings, or animals, or abstract concepts, or father/daughter couples] who love each other and want to commit for an indefinite period of time" -- in other words, to render it virtually meaningless and unrecognizable.
Yes, I fully condemn people like Britney Spears and Kim Kardashian who make a mockery out of traditional marriage as well -- but who can blame them, given the attempt to redefine marriage that has been carried out since the sexual revolution? They were never raised to know what marriage is or what it is supposed to be.
I'm also furious about the smear job against Chick-Fil-A that's being perpetuated by the MSM. For example, Boston mayor Thomas Menino said, "If they [Chick-Fil-A] need licenses in the city, it will be very difficult - unless they open up their policies."
WHAT POLICIES? Chick-Fil-A has no policies regarding gay people. They don't refuse to hire or serve those who identify as gay. So what policies are Menino referring to?
Chick-Fil-A's founder, Dan Cathy, stands for traditional marriage and donates to groups that also stand for traditional marriage, but "standing for traditional marriage" is NOT synonymous with "homophobia" no matter how much the MSM wants you to think so. Please, people, quit drinking the liberal Kool-Aid and THINK!
And don't get me STARTED on how the vast majority of those I know who are in favor of same-sex "marriage" are also pro-"choice." The logic is bizarre. I'm "anti-gay" because I stand for traditional marriage as a basic cornerstone of society, as it has been, historically, for thousands of years (in pagan societies as well as Jewish and Christian ones), but they get all up in arms when I point out that they favor denying actual human rights to innocent human beings. I think that that it's a crime to murder the unborn, and I think it's morally wrong to unjustly discriminate against those who identify as gay. Unlikely as it is, if science were to discover a "gay gene" that was able to be diagnosed prenatally, I would also oppose the abortion of unborn children on the basis of their sexual orientation. Yet I'M the alleged bigot?
So do me a favor, any liberal who is reading this, and stop calling me "anti-gay." Disagree with me all you want, but have the courtesy to disagree with what I actually believe instead of what you think I believe.
I don't see how I can be "anti-gay" when I believe that all people, gay or straight, are human beings with intrinsic worth, dignity, and value, and I've yet to encounter a single person who can explain to me -- using LOGIC AND REASON, not just pure emotion -- how that belief is hateful and homophobic.
If anyone believes they can, then please, feel free to try.