- Agile 451
- Skype: danielle.hallett
I'm going to try to explain something which seems painfully obvious to me, yet seems to leave various overly right-wing and religious folk completely baffled; There are many people in the world who I disagree with and many with whom I agree but there are few people I disagree with more than Fred Phelps and the rest of his poisoned progeny at the Westboro Baptist Church. However, as much as I strongly disagree with their views, if someone asked me to vote on a law that would ban them from saying the things they do or prevent them from carrying out the protests that they do I will emphatically vote no.
You see, as vile as I consider Phelps and his brood of idiots to be I have no desire to forcibly impose my views onto them. Doing so would not only deprive the world of everyones favourite villains, it also goes against everything I believe in when if comes to freedom of speech. This *absolutely* does not mean I approve of what they say. My vote would be a yes vote freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of political views and freedom to peaceably assemble. I understand that protecting their rights, even sick lunatics, preserves my own rights.
I think religious people are confused by this concept. I think they get into a voting booth and see the word gay written anything and automatically vote null because they think voting yes would amount to the tacit approval. Many of them would vote to outlaw sodomy if given the opportunity because their Bible preachers against it, but what they can't wrap their brain around is the idea that their religious views should not be imposed by law on those who don't share that was religious views. To do so removes another person's right to exercise their own religious views or lack thereof.
Some people, due to their religious views, would vote to ban blood transfusions because they believe their religion preaches against it. If they voted in favour of banning blood transfusions, the factors, they would be trying to impose their religious views on everyone else.
Here are a few things we can say for sure about gay marriage;
Not everyone holds the same religious and political views.
Some religions even condone and perform gay marriages.
Three some people aren't religious at all.
Now, you may disagree with those people, which is fine, but what isn't fine is your insistence to impose your views on them. They disagree with you. They don't believe the same things you do, yet you would force them to live in accordance with your political and religious views.
I just don't get why it is such a complicated concept. When it comes to gay marriage, it has nothing to do with you or your religious views.
No one is forcing you to marry someone of the same sex.
No one is imposing their losing you.
No one is hurting anyone.
No one is taking anything that doesn't belong to them.
Everything is between consensual adults. That means from a secular standpoint there is absolutely no reason to people of the same sex should be prevented from getting married. That also means the only reason left against it are religious ones and those are supposed to govern your own life-not everyone else's around you. Voting yes to gay marriage means you think everyone should be free to govern their own lives within the confines of the golden rules they not hurt anyone else or impede another person's rights. It does not mean you personally approve of it.