How does tolerance for gay rights "attack" religious freedom?

Question

I just read the following [quoted below from a Yahoo news story] and would like to know how tolerance for gays causes "attacks" on religious "freedom":

By expanding the discussion from marriage to religious expression, social conservatives say they will reconnect with religious voters and religious leaders who don't necessarily view same-sex unions as a threat. "There are a number of pastors that said, 'Look, we don't get involved in politics, I'm not going to get involved in this issue, I just want to preach the gospel,'" said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. "When they realize their ability to preach the gospel may very well be at stake, they may reconsider their involvement." ...>

Continued:

<< ...Perkins and others are building a case file of anecdotes where they say religious people have spoken out against gay marriage only to be punished. Perkins specifically cited the decision by Maryland Gov. Robert Ehrlich in June to fire his appointee to the Washington area transit board after the board member referred to homosexuals as "persons of sexual deviancy." The board member, Robert J. Smith, said he was expressing his personal beliefs as a Roman Catholic.>

Neil R: Your bible quotes have nothing to do with the question.

p2of9: You're tangling definitions and misconstruing them. Tolerance is acceptance. Tolerance means "a fair, objective, and permissive attitude toward those whose opinions, practices, race, religion, nationality, etc., differ from one's own; freedom from bigotry." In other words, it's called LIVE AND LET LIVE. That's what gays have been asking for, and that in no way abridges or interferes with the rights of "religious" persons.

Answer 1

What they are trying to do is say because they are being told not to preach their intolerance, that theyare victims of intolerance. I hope people realize that a preacher who says "kill your child if it talks back" is also preachingfrom the Bible. Arewe intolerant if we silence him? Biggotry hidden under religious freedom is still biggotry.

Answer 2

Here is a basic misunderstanding: marriage is a legal entity defined under government law. It may be performed by a clergyman (or woman) but only after the couple obtain a marriage license from the state. When this union is dissolved, it is done through the courts of law, not a church. Isn't that true?

With that in mind, the government should not interfer with couples of any religion or gender forming a legal fiction called a marriage.

Now, whether or not a church condones marriages is certainly up to the church. However, I find it strange and ugly that the US gives tax-free status to these corporations called churches, especially when they are engaged in political activism.

Civil unions sounds good but does not afford the same inheritance, right of visitation, and other legal status that marriage does. Not in the US.

Whom I live with, sleep with, or dance the mambo with is not anyone else's business but mine and those who engage in such with me.

It is the first cry of the oppressor that they themselves are the ones being oppressed. The Neo-Cons want to whip something up, anything, to distract us from the ~3000 Americans killed in a warrantless war, and now being shown to be one even in the right wing press. But look at the Nazis after Kristalnacht or the Romans who claimed the Christians started the great fire under Nero. Yep, repression of religion!

They should all get down and pray for groups like the ACLU that have protected their right to a freedom of religion. Just think, what would it be like if America did become a Theocrasy...maybe under Sun Myung Moon or Scientology.

Answer 3

I'll answer your question as you answered mine.

I think the seeds of fear have been sewn into Christianity by evangelical leaders. You see it in politics and you see it in futurist eschatology.

The "Roman Road" to the gospel is the primary tool of savvy evangelicals, and using that proselytizing technique involves pointing out the sins of the sinner. They think, for some reason, that some homosexuals out there in the world don't know the popular opinion of homosexuals by Christians or the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah or Paul's forbidding the "effeminate".

Evangelical Christians fear that their ability to spread the gospel freely will be hindered. I think this can be a valid fear IF we are forbidding Freedom of Speech (which we are, but hey, let's work on getting rid of that restriction instead of restricting other people's rights to get married, right?).

Answer 4

lets first look at the myth of gay rights, Gays have no rights. Humans have rights. now lets look at what rights humans do have.

speech, press, religion, & assebly are the four baics everyone likes throwing out. religion being the best when it comes to marriage. however marriage is an institute started by religion, so the government should have no right to play in any decision to who can and cannot be wed.

and since many religions do not accept homosexual love as authentic, they will not marry them, and many people think that is against their "rights"

Answer 5

I have no clue where they get off claiming that allowing adults to marry adults of the same gender will somehow keep them from practicing their religion as they choose to.

They are still free to be stupid bigots and preach about whatever hate they want. They won't even have to marry gay people. It doesn't effect them at all.

I don't understand why some stupid jerks have to deny people rights just to feel better about themselves. Though it has been shown that 3/4ths of Homophobes are attracted to people of the same gender, so maybe they are just scared that their secret lovers will want them to divorce their wives and get a gay marriage?

Answer 6

Some big problems with gay "marriage"

a) Why not have "same-sex partnership", like they have in England. Elton John is OK with that, and so am I. But gay "marriage" slanders the intention of marriage.

b) legalized gay "marriage" will lead to churches being persecuted for refusing to marry gays. In Canada, talk amongst gay extremists has already included discussion of cutting churches off of tax-free status if they don't marry gays.

c) Also in Canada, just the discussion amongst Christians that the government should guarantee their freedom of speech and religion in regards to homosexuality and the Bible is sparking rage amongst gay extremists. In other words, the gay extremists are already against freedom of speech and freedom of religion.


p2of9 - BANG ON!!!!! Couldn't have said it better!


Neoart is the typical liberal hypocrite. He is trying to supress the right of Christians to live their beliefs, while saying HE is being supressed. Then he accuses Christians of doing what HE is doing.

Answer 7

"Donald Rumsfeld is frightened approximately homosexual marriage and the slippery slope in the direction of polygamy" i do no longer see the project? are any of the persons in touch Underage? are any of the persons in touch being compelled into the marriage? If no longer..who cares! enable them to marry as many as they might take care of to pay for...does not injury every person

Answer 8

The word "tolerance" is being misused a lot. To tolerate something is to put up with it, whether you agree or not. The "tolerance" that gays are demanding is not tolerance by this definition. What they are demanding is acceptance and encouragement, and if Christians aren't willing to give them, then we are attacked as "Fundamentalists" and "politically incorrect". Our churches are being coerced into changing their values to accept gays, Even though the fact that they are unrepentently, actively sinning clearly means that they are not saved. These churches are doing a disservice to the gay community by lying to them, instead of trying to save them.

Answer 9

Well, it's the loss of freedom to discriminate and use hurtful prejudice I think that's really "attacking" anyone's religious freedom.

Religion wants people to hate each other - people that are trying to be tolerant to each other is clearly against religion.

Answer 10

Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.
Leviticus 18:21-23 (in Context) Leviticus 18 (Whole Chapter)
Leviticus 20:13
If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.
Leviticus 20:12-14 (in Context) Leviticus 20 (Whole Chapter)