AWKWARD ZOMBIE

I don't see a person making such a decision based on strong personal conviction as them "being an asshole". If that person then goes on to lead a concerted effort to get other people to not attend or cause any other problems to damage the experience for others, then that's something that I can't abide.

I'd like to think that, in this hypothetical wedding situation, there would be some level of mutual understanding between the two parties in regards to their ideologies, as to be invited to a wedding you would have had to know that person for a while, either as friends or family. To an outsider that person may seem like a jerk but to the people involved, that person who refuses to attend may still be a dear friend or family member with years of shared experiences that can't simply be thrown away or forgotten. I wouldn't expect to see complete disavowal of friends and family (the kind you'd see in some sort of made-for-TV drama or Oscar Bait films) in most of the situations in which someone refuses to attend a same-sex wedding based on their personal belief; only in the most extreme cases would you most likely see that.

It's their strong personal conviction that makes them an asshole (this is probably different to what turbo was saying). For example if you believe interracial marriage is wrong you're an asshole. Note that being an asshole doesn't mean you have to act like an asshole too. Also note that it's not illegal to be an asshole, nor even act like one to a certain extent.

And just to be clear, this is all just my personal opinion. I think people who discriminate homosexuals are bigoted assholes, obviously not every one thinks the same.

The way that hypothetical person was expressing their refusal is what I was talking about. Simply declining is fine, declining and then specifying it's because it's a same sex wedding is what makes you an asshole.

What "mutual understanding" can there be in that situation, where one person dislikes another for a part of them that they cannot change? Isn't it messed up to refuse to consider someone's rights and then act like they have to accept that it's your opinion? Discrimination is discrimination, and I don't understand saying people ought to accept anyone being a homophobe just because it's their "personal beliefs". That's one easy cop-out for people who don't want to justify that they hate gay people and/ or want to stop them from being equal in society's eyes.

I don't see how having an opinion is bad
Preventing people from legitimately infringing on someone's rights at a public level is one thing, but preventing them from simply having an opinion is outright wrong.

Nobody is saying people should be forbidden from having an opinion.

However, having a bad opinion makes you a bad person. If you think all jews should be exterminated, you are basically Hitler, even if you don't actually cause the Holocaust. woops Godwin's law

Just like how a psychopath doesn't need to go on a killing spree to be diagnosed as a psychopath.

It is a bit of a quandary for people of faith, especially for those who've been commanded to love their neighbor as themselves but also that marriage is a man+woman deal.

One of the reasons I brought up the "declined the invitation" example is that a friend recently told me about a young woman he's acquainted with who announced she was getting "married" via a hand-fasting ceremony and had invited several Christians she knew to attend. Some accepted and some didn't. When asked for their reasons those who declined cited religious reasons. Upon further examination it turned up that they probably weren't comfortable with the apparent "contract" with malleable vows that hand-fasting seems to imply - they didn't want to support a ceremony that could be voided when either party just felt like it. Rather than try to clear things up, the woman apparently decided it was a good excuse to label those who weren't coming as hateful.

It's safe to say there's still people around who hate gays, same as there's people who hate anyone else. There's also a lot of people who don't agree with the idea of gay marriage but wouldn't treat homosexuals any different when a wedding isn't involved. I see people as falling into more than just the white/black categories of "hurrahs and confetti at the pride parade" and "unlawful intolerance based on irrational fear or hatred". The attempts to abolish that middle ground worry me, particularly when the comparison that's made is to a group of people who wanted to render another group extinct. Is that really fair?

I should hope the only opinions considered "bad" are those that involve the harming of other people, because otherwise, opinions are just that, opinions. They affect bodaciously nothing. And I use "bodaciously" as its original definition. Opinions affect bodaciously nothing. UNLESS you have mental problems, in which case they merely provide a target for a trigger.

Opinion's affect a lot of things. Opinions affect your decision making and considerations. They affect who you vote for, who you hire, who you associate with, who you think is trustworthy or inherently "good".

It's no one's job to police people's opinions, but people should understand that just because you have the right to an opinion about how other people should live their lives, doesn't mean that hose opinions aren't bad or inherently flawed. It doesn't matter what your religion is. Being religious doesn't entitle you to respect or special allowances or protections for your opinions. It simply entitles you to think a certain way.

The middle ground is a myth, atleast when it comes to the matters of civil rights. Its easy to demand a middle ground when you're the part that isnt really affected one way or the other, but the disenfranchised groups shouldnt have to settle for less just so the majority can feel comfortable over completely arbitrary social divisions. There is yes, or there is no.

I'm sorry to put it like this, but you guys are sounding more and more like the bigots you are complaining about. I care a lot about a lot of causes. I can't care about every single cause to the point you want me to care. I just don't have time and energy in my life to do that, but I'm apparently against your cause and a bigot for that.

In my opinion, for most people, having an opinion means acting upon that opinion, even in ways that these people may not be aware of. Much like Vax said, among the people who think same-sex marriage shouldn't be legal are many that will discriminate against homosexual and bisexual people at their own little level, from looking at them with disapproving eyes, to not accepting them in their establishments, to refusing to hire them, to gossiping about them and acting differently about them and making them feel othered and unwelcome.
I have a problem with people who have bad opinions of gay and bi people and who are against same-sex marriage because they're more likely to discriminate against me, against some of the people I care for, and against a growing number of individuals that don't deserve it. Really, thinking that opinions don't change how someone act is wishful thinking, an opinion will almost always colour not only someone's perception but also someone's actions and words.


Brekk, at no point did Stranger say that not being active for a cause made you a bigot. He said that people that are discriminated against shouldn't have to accept a "middle ground" as it would mean they'd keep being discriminated against just so other people wouldn't be made uncomfortable by things they aren't used to. There cannot be a middle ground for human rights.

So you're just making assumptions?

And you're still essentially saying that people who don't share your opinion are terrible and should change their opinion to cater to you.

As a bi guy I'm talking not only from experience but from what my own non-hetero friends have experienced too.


I can't believe you managed to twist me not wanting to be discriminated against and wanting to be safe into me being an evil guy that wants to get his way other people's opinions be damned. Jesus Christ, this is really gross.

I'm not asking for people to be what I want them to be. I'm saying that people who think same-sex marriage is wrong reinforce the already existing discrimination against same-sex couples. And that's wrong.

No, he's simply saying that homosexuals don't simply have to accept and "deal with" you not being okay with gay marriage. And also that people not being okay with gay marriage usually stems from a deeper feeling of uncomfortableness or even resentment with/against homosexuality. Which is not a very far-fetched assumption, seeing as I've seen just as many people argue homosexuality is ok with the Bible as against.

And yes, if you think homosexuals are deserving of less rights than other human beings, or that homosexuality is in anyway not a-okay, you are pretty much a terrible person.


Great Handsome Oppressor ninja'd me but I'm leaving this post up as is.