Gringo, you know I'm grateful for your friendship. But I'm going to respectfully disagree with you.
Gringo said:
I suspect that at the end of the day, it' not REALLY about gay MARRIAGE for gays ANYMORE than it was about just ANY seat on Rosa Park's bus. She wanted a PARTICULAR seat.
The whites in Alabama didn't think of Mrs. Parks as their equal. THE PROBLEM WAS that Mrs Parks thought of HERSELF as their equal and she wanted THEIR seat.
That's not at all an accurate analogy. If the seat is marriage in your analogy, then homosexuals can sit down in that seat. They have equal rights to marry someone of the opposite sex. As such, they are equally protected under the law in that, if someone makes a law that says a homosexual cannot marry someone of the opposite sex because it would be a farce (or for whatever other reason), the 14th amendment says that that law would be struck down. While that scenario is unlikely, that is how Equal Protection under the Constitution would work. That's how our Equal Protection jurisprudence has always been. Equal rights for all.
To make your analogy more consistent with what's going on, we'd have to tweak it. What's really happening here is that homosexuals don't want to sit down in the seat of heterosexual marriage. They want everyone else on the bus to construct a new seat (homosexual marriage) for them. Society says no. Again, homosexuals can still sit in the seat of heterosexual marriage. They just haven't convinced everyone that a new seat (homosexual marriage) should be created for them.
Gringo said:
And today gays are not thought of as equal, but immoral. THE PROBLEM is that gays don't think of THEMSELVES as immoral or less inferior. And they want YOUR seat.
I don't think homosexuals are inferior to me. Homosexuals are equal to me in terms of worth and dignity because they were created in the image of God. They are also my equal in that we both desperately need the grace of God because of our sinfulness.
Gringo said:
For several hundred years in this country, we enslaved people for our own profit. And if we wanted to, we could point to certain verses in the Bible to back us up. But there "came a day" in the 19th century when that all changed. We realized that regardless of what Paul said, it wasn't right to enslave people. And we stopped it.
You're not giving Paul a fair shake, but I don't want to get into a debate about the differences between OT slavery and modern-day slavery. I'll just say this: the first instance of a civil society outlawing slavery was led by William Wilberforce, whose efforts, motivated by the words of Paul which you disdain, eventually led to its abolition in England. Abolitionist efforts in the North were also led by ministers who used the Bible to condemn slavery. Yes, evil people in the South did justify slavery using the Bible. But it's not as simplistic as you're making it out to be.
Gringo said:
If you really intend to keep gay people out of your white marriage seat on your rusting bus, you better fight HARDER than you did when they took prayer from your children in school and when they legalized abortion.
Again, gays are free to sit in the seat of heterosexual marriage. No one is stopping them. In some states, the people on the bus have created a new seat. In others, the people decided not to create a new seat.
Gringo said:
For gays, I don't think they are concerned with the "definition" of marriage. THEY know, regardless if you do or not, that they are not the same as murderers and drug dealers and that they are just as deserving of everything YOU have.
Again, the seat of heterosexual marriage, and every other right I possess is also available to homosexuals under the Constitution.
Gringo said:
Invictus can call them "queer" and call for their execution. Christundivided can call them "queer" and say it's all about the money. There's always going to be people like this just like there's always going to be people that call Negroes "niggars". The Negroes knew that if they were ever going to be treated fairly, they couldn't wait on the white people. They had to rise up. And when they did, they were surprised to find white people marching alongside of them.
I don't condone any of that.
Gringo said:
And I think what is happening today is that gays are beginning to rise up. And there are more and more "white people" right alongside them. Both the gay people AND the people alongside them, Christundivided, know that gay people have the ability to love and that it's not about money or sex.
Many African-Americans do not like your characterization of what they faced with what homosexuals face. There is a considerable distance betwixt the two.
Gringo said:
It's about expressing THEIR love for their loved one JUST LIKE you do for yours, regardless of what Paul said.
I suspect that if straights were married in some OTHER way, that's what gays would be seeking as well.
The North Carolinenans have pulled out their hoses and let out the dogs but it's only temporary.
Eventually, "Governor Wallace will have to stand aside".
They would not be fighting for Equal Protection and constitutional rights like African Americans were, though. They would be fighting to create a new right.
And incendiary language of likening people who disagree with gay marriage to the worst racists is not going to help your cause, Gringo.
