I ask this in all seriousness. Like everyone else, I have members of my family who identify as gay or lesbian. I work with homosexuals. And I have homosexuals who I consider friends. Save for my co-workers, all the gay people in my life know my religious convictions and political views. None of them believe I hate gay people, think they are second-class citizens, or that they’re icky, yet they all know I oppose same-sex marriage. However, in this setting, where I share my views on religious, political, and social issues, it seems that people believe if I oppose same-sex marriage, I hate gay people and I’m obviously an intolerant bigot.
Is it possible for a person to have principled moral objections to same-sex marriage and/or same-sex sexual relationships and not be hateful and bigoted?
I’m really not sure proponents of same-sex marriage and gay activists believe this is possible. Sure, many might say it is possible. Of course you can have objections, they reassure. But this concession seems to come with an unspoken caveat: you can have your objections, but just know you’re wrong and don’t dare think you’re right, because if you do, then you’re a hateful bigot.
I have a long track record of objecting to same-sex marriage without citing the Bible. In fact I never cite a religious reason when arguing against it. I can also say I haven’t had anyone cite anything I’ve said and been able to describe it as hateful…except to merely point to the fact that I object and declare my objecting as what is hateful.
How can there be any meaningful discussion or debate if one side of the issue simply decides that dissent from their view is hateful and bigoted? Wouldn’t it be more productive to take people at their word about how they feel, and not try to read between the lines? On what basis can one side or the other declare the issue is settled without debate?