Reading an article about whining in Utah over same-sex marriage.

[conuly]

Why, exactly, do certain parties insist on referring to the mere existence of gays as having been "shoved down their throats"? There are so many different ways to say "I think gay people are icky and have cooties" without actually using those words, so why do they invariably choose the one phrase that is full of entendre? I would say that the punchlines write themselves, but it's so predictable that its not even that funny anymore.

Comments

[elenbarathi.livejournal.com]

I suppose that's done intentionally, to squick people with a metaphor of violation.

The truth is, what's being 'shoved down their throats' is the fact that they are not more equal than others. and have no right under the law to inflict their religious beliefs on people who don't share them. My point is that they obviously don't believe in their own alleged 'beliefs' anyway, or they'd devote their energy to following Christ, not to persecuting oythers.

I think it's important to be clear about that, whether or not one identifies as a Christian. Jesus stated in no uncertain terms what he expected of his followers; how they were to live in the world, and that pious words and public displays would not fool God about what was in their hearts. He didn't allow for any 'lukewarm' either; what we call 'half-assed' these days, and he had a LOT to say on the subject of 'whited sepulchres'.

What do the Christians say, every time some perverse Bible-thumper gets caught in a heinous crime? "He wasn't a Real Christian!" Okay then, fine, let's separate the sheep from the goats: everybody who's living by the word of Christ on one side, and everybody who's just paying it lip service on the other. I don't see any reason why either Christians or non-Christians should give any 'benefit of the doubt' to fake Christians, when Jesus himself said that he sure wasn't going to.

[conuly]

"I suppose that's done intentionally, to squick people with a metaphor of violation"

I guess, but the only violation here is their refusal to keep their obsession with other people's sex acts to themselves. Hell, I don't think most people think about their own sex lives as much as these people think about what other people are doing!

"I don't see any reason why either Christians or non-Christians should give any 'benefit of the doubt' to fake Christians, when Jesus himself said that he sure wasn't going to."

I guess it comes under "judge not", but then so does "stop obsessing over the gays!", so I don't know how they rationalize it to themselves. It's not very likely that there is an afterlife (or that if there is, that any one of us is right about what it entails), but if there was such a thing it would certainly be funny, in a schadenfreudy way, to listen to them all get chewed up and spewed out for being raging hypocrites and jerks.

*thinks* of course, that only applies to those Christians who are hypocrites and/or jerks, which ought to go without saying, but just in case.