7ony (7ony) wrote,

I've decided I did a facebook friend a disservice today.

She posted a utube video of the Zach Wahl's testimony before the Iowa Legislators (below). She asked this question: "How can you disagree with this?":

I'm a zero tolerance kind of guy with respect to bigotry and immediately made the following comment: "IMHO, only narrow-minded bigots would disagree with Zach Wahls." I realized too late that my facebook friend was trying to initiate a dialog among her friends and my churlish comment effectively cut the dialog short. Who could respond in a meaningful way after that comment?

I'm trying to feel bad about my comment, but the truth is that I've already heard all the dialog I care to hear against same sex couples. It is narrow-minded bigotry, and it comes in two flavors: (1) that homosexuality is an abomination and (2) that abominators do terrible things to kids.

I have no argument with item (2), abominators do terrible things to kids, except to point out that these abominators, or predators come from all sexual orientations. And if one were to judge from the national daily news, the heterosexual predators outnumber the homosexual ones by a large margin and belong to groups you'd like to least expect: educators, coaches, and ministers. It makes no sense to label all homosexuals as predators. That would be bigotry.

More often than not, Item (1) that homosexuality is an abomination, stems from a religious belief. Sadly, I have scant knowledge of the religions outside of Christianity so I will constrain my comments that faith. There is no consensus among Christians on the belief that homosexuality is an abomination. It is estimated that there are over 32,000 Christian denominations. From my perspective, it appears that about half do hold that belief and half don't. Admittedly, those that do are definitely more vocal than those that don't. Certainly, there are verses in the Bible that claim the abomination. However, there are many things in the bible that are labeled abominations.

The bible is complex and can give one plenty of wiggle room. It is not easy to apply it to life in the world today. I refuse to argue against ones faith. That's not the real issue here. The real issue is our Constitutionally-guaranteed right of individual freedom. There is nothing in the Constitution that limits the freedom and rights of a homosexual. It's simple. They have a Constitutional right to be what they are, and anyone who objects has a Constitutional right to be a narrow-minded bigot.

  • Alt-ObamaCare or RepublicanCare

    I've heard the Repeal ACA, or Alt-ObamaCare, called many names, some not very nice. The latest name I've heard on the news is TrumpCare. I…

  • I'm lonesome

    I'm feeling a bit lonely, today. I've considered myself a Conservative since before Goldwater ran for president. I believe in personal and…

  • 2016 Voters in Oklahoma

    The estimated Oklahoma population is 3,943,066 persons The number of age 18 and older Oklahomans is estimated to be about 2,807,548, living in…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.