The post attacks a general position derived from what catalana said. I agree that I went too far in maligning people's motives, and for that I apologise...but in fact I don't know of any benign motive for maintaining that everyone should not be equal under the law, and really, however long I think about it, I can't see any more to this specific issue than that specific question: should gay people have the same rights as straight people when it comes to forming and maintaining relationships?
Answers like "well, it's not as simple as that" or "we need time to consider the implications" or "leave it with us, we'll let you know" need to be followed up fairly quickly with specific reasons why it is not a good idea to make the desired changes, why the problem is more complex than it seems, why the people concerned can't sit at the front of the bus or go to the same schools or get married in the same places as other people. Otherwise hot heads like me leap to the conclusion that temporising is the only response we'll get.
catalana has explained that she wants our whole system of religio-political rights and responsibilities overhauled, but that in the meantime she supports gay marriage, which is fine but then why bother to post objecting to the meme? I really can't see any purpose other than to make the people who posted it feel small, stupid and useless, and I object to that. There was probably some residual resentment as well from the last time she and I bumped heads over this kind of thing.
madfilkentist objected to it on the grounds that it was just repeating other people's words, which is in my opinion a trivial and pointless objection, but one I can at least see the reasoning behind. He then linked to an excellent article in support of the cause.
keristor and others have been all on their dignity about the fact that the wording of the meme excludes them, which is a valid reaction, I suppose. I did come up with an even more inclusive version, but I'm not going to bother going back for it now.
You and billroper and howeird and others have all supported the statement that the problem is more complex or nuanced or whatever by saying "yes it is" but haven't said in what way, apart from howeird bringing in the separate issue of children. I'm ready to believe if shown that there is a good reason why one lot of humans has to have a lower status and fewer rights than another lot. I'm imaginative. I can conceive of a lot of things. But I need some straw to make the bricks with.
If the objection is religious, then I can deal with it. You know I'm not blindly opposed to religion, even when I don't agree with it. But there has to be some reason for saying that these people are not clearly and presently entitled to this right--that we have the right to keep it from them while we deliberate the nuances and contemplate the complexities. I don't think we do. I don't think we ever did. And I haven't yet been shown a reason to believe otherwise.
Again, I'm sorry for maligning your motives and everyone else's. I'm just a little lost here.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2008-11-01 08:47 am (UTC)Answers like "well, it's not as simple as that" or "we need time to consider the implications" or "leave it with us, we'll let you know" need to be followed up fairly quickly with specific reasons why it is not a good idea to make the desired changes, why the problem is more complex than it seems, why the people concerned can't sit at the front of the bus or go to the same schools or get married in the same places as other people. Otherwise hot heads like me leap to the conclusion that temporising is the only response we'll get.
You and
If the objection is religious, then I can deal with it. You know I'm not blindly opposed to religion, even when I don't agree with it. But there has to be some reason for saying that these people are not clearly and presently entitled to this right--that we have the right to keep it from them while we deliberate the nuances and contemplate the complexities. I don't think we do. I don't think we ever did. And I haven't yet been shown a reason to believe otherwise.
Again, I'm sorry for maligning your motives and everyone else's. I'm just a little lost here.