LogFAQs > #945500780

_HayleyWilliams posted...

But it is not always a religious institution and the clear implication by American conservatives is to protect Christianity and assert its dominance in the country.

We don't need to redefine a word just because some people feel their freedom is attacked if gay are described as "married". This is just hateful people reiterating that the LGBT community should be othered. The whole "I should be free to practice my religion" is just a bullshit smoke screen. That argument doesn't even make sense. "You and I doing the same thing independent of each other is an attack on my freedom!"

Conversely, if the state had conferred equal rights through civil unions and people didn't hyper obsess over "if it's not called marriage it doesn't count" then people wouldn't have to be sitting here stressing that the supreme court might change its mind. Hyper conservative Christians couldn't argue that their religious freedoms were violated because gay people would be getting civil unions (and so would everyone else from a legal perspective).

I'm simply suggesting that there was a path forward that got everyone what they wanted, but whatever. This is an old issue and I'm not even arguing against anyone because we're all defending the right of gay people to marry, so let's not take this any further because there's no point.

---

"History Is Much Like An Endless Waltz. The Three Beats Of War, Peace And Revolution Continue On Forever." - Gundam Wing: Endless Waltz