Where I stand on the issue of marriage equality

[Outis]

You don't want to attend a gay marriage? That's your right.

Your church doesn't want to officiate at a gay marriage? That's your right.

You don't want to socialize with a gay couple? That's your right.

You want to speak out against homosexuality or gay marriage? That's your right.

You want to believe homosexuality is sinful? That's your right.

Any of the above I would support, would help defend, would contribute to your legal defense if sued, and would protest if you faced legal sanction. However, your right to do these things does not defend you from the social response (including disagreement). If you get called a bigot because you do the above things, well, that's pretty much your problem.

You want to impose your views on others via secular law? I oppose this.

Is that really so hard to understand? Or am I still "repressing" your rights ... at least in your views?

[Epoetker]

Where I stand:

Anyone who adds the word "equality" to a word that stands perfectly well on its own has no conception of how the word is supposed to work.

Anyone who imagines that civil law can govern marriage more effectively than cultural tradition is fooling themselves. The vast majority of men and women take their cues on marriage and family from their own parents, grandparents, neighborhoods, and churches. Inviting the force of the federal state into it except at the most general level is asking for trouble. The leaching of the Christian tradition and its replacement by the primacy of state edicts on the matter was a long and slow process brought about by the intrusion of both the state and its proxies over time. Today, in any operative sense, the state is the left, and the left is the state.

Even if serious, the premise that you, Outis, as an individual, will stand against the state and its agents, whom you likely depend on for all sorts of sustenance, is silly. Gay marriage is pushed by a distinctive group of various wire-pullers, officials, journalists, and sexual deviants, who will not accept any democratic referendums against the issue without pulling one of their judges to rule against it, and who will not live their lives quietly but choose various forms of mob intimidation against individuals who say anything bad about them.

Even if you volunteered to protect me, I would not accept it, knowing that your sympathies broadly overlap with the enemies of normality on several other issues, and even if you were both as sincere and as dedicated to following this declaration, your inability to recognize the reality of your enemies and your personal lack of mobility in the face of, say, gay street protesters (who, being body-worshiping hedonists, spend plenty of time in the gym, and who, being a protected class, are quite willing and able to get away with civil and criminal actions against their opponents thanks to a highly sympathetic media opinion and willingness to cover up stories on anything they do) would be to throw you to the lions.

You would be, in short, both a major security risk and a burden to the rest of those fighting, and I, and any thinking person, would reject your help, and treat your declaration as most likely to be mendacious and insincere.

[Darth Executor]

You don't want to attend a gay marriage? That's your right.

Your church doesn't want to officiate at a gay marriage? That's your right.

You don't want to socialize with a gay couple? That's your right.

You want to speak out against homosexuality or gay marriage? That's your right.

You want to believe homosexuality is sinful? That's your right.

Any of the above I would support, would help defend, would contribute to your legal defense if sued, and would protest if you faced legal sanction. However, your right to do these things does not defend you from the social response (including disagreement). If you get called a bigot because you do the above things, well, that's pretty much your problem.

You want to impose your views on others via secular law? I oppose this.

Is that really so hard to understand? Or am I still "repressing" your rights ... at least in your views?

Your words are not worth anything when you've repeatedly confirmed you are willing to use the power of the state (which is always rooted in violence) to extract money and labor from Christians for the purpose of funding and supporting anti-Christian institutions. You are the guy putting a gun to a bakery owner's head and demanding that they either cater to a gay wedding or, ultimately, bite the bullet. You are every bit the tyrant you project on others.

[Ferodaktyl]

"Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters"...
It is sad, but this is the world we live in. Tolerance has become the greatest sin amongst fanatics.