mrstickball said:
Wonktonodi said:
mrstickball said:
I haven't read every comment, but how many people are discussing the fact that Rahm Emmanuel and Boston's mayor are using the power of their office to bar a business from their cities, whereas the statement from Truett Cathy has virtually no bearing on the business, nor people that are gay?
Talk about a double standard. If Chicago or Boston banned a business because it was run by blacks, wouldn't that be pretty bigoted? Only one entity in this discussion effects anyone else - and it isn't Chick-fil-A or Truett Cathy. |
The discussion has gone a bit away from that. While I agree that the governments shouldn't bar over statements. I think where some of the money had gone with the charities does have some baring. http://equalitymatters.org/blog/201103220005#1
I don't think your double standard comparison is good. If they were going after the business because they are Christian then I could see the comparison. That isn't the reason though it's because they have given money to charities that are anti gay. If it was just Christian charities and this was being done I too would be outraged. That isn't the case though, this is not tolerating the intolerant.
|
You....Do realize that the vast majority of Christians hold to the Bible as being correct. Therefore, when it talks about homosexuality as being one of a large group of sexual issues that they are to avoid, that already puts them in that "bigoted, hateful" category by your standards, right?
There's a difference between a group promoting traditional marriage and values, and being a group that targets and hates gays. I know of most of those organizations that EqualityMatters discusses. The vast majority of work that they do has nothing to do with gays or gay rights at all. They simply take a Biblical stand on the issue (as 80% of all churches do across the denominational spectrum), which automatically puts them in the targets of groups like Equality Matters... Which seems to be hellbent not on equality, but forcing everyone to accept their viewpoint as the only one being correct (which to me sounds just as bigoted as the organizations they target).
|
The vast majority of the work, certainly, but occasionally they organize or put funding towards efforts like California's Prop 8, making targeting them a viable action. And because they are indeed working to deny legal rights to a certain group of people, this is something that should be duly campaigned against.
Your line of thinking bothers me because the notion of "bigotry" is not a two-way street. Would people who harrass the Ku Klux Klan for what that group does be considered bigots? The efforts to correct bigotry, either by discrediting bigots or working to reform their views, is not bigotry itself.
