You know, my father met MLK Jr.

[conuly]

I doubt he could've told me the man's stand on gay rights, though.

*sighs s'more*

Edit: There's also some ranting by the AFA. Ever notice how all their AFs are these blond kids? Weird.

Comments

[jedirita.livejournal.com]

I couldn't link to the article because I'm too lazy to subscribe to the news service. However, for what it's worth, I do think MLK would have supported gay rights. Of course, we all want MLK to agree with us, but I'd like to point out that two of his proteges, Jesse Jackson and Andrew Young, support gay rights. Also his South African counterparts, Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela, support gay rights. It seems absurd to suggest that those four men would have evolved in their thinking to support gay rights, yet MLK would not.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

Try this one. (http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/nationworld/articles/1355891.html)

[jedirita.livejournal.com]

Ah, thanks! That one worked.

[staircase-wit.livejournal.com]

I suppose it would be nice if he did, but does it matter if he didn't? If he didn't support gay rights, it would probably be due to a Biblical or civil excuse. Both excuses - that God condemns it or that it contributes to the "breakdown of the family and the erosion of traditional marriage" are ultimately overshadowed by his own adultry. God's condemnation of adultry is on the Short List of What God Wants (different lists are circulating, but I believe it's on every version of the Ten Commandments), and some people would consider adultry to be the erosion of traditional marriage... although others could argue convincingly that it is in fact a vital part of traditional marriage, given the statistics involved.

YMMV.

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

Incidentally, if you ever end up with an article from a Knight Ridder newspaper that requires registration (they all have the RealCities logo at the bottom), just change the domain name in the link to macon.com to avoid the registration prompt. (See? (http://www.macon.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/10661072.htm))

[ex-chaos-by-699.livejournal.com]

There's also BugMeNot (http://www.bugmenot.com). And it's also available as a Firefox extension where you can right-click on a registration form and it automatically fills in fake registration info for you. :)

[eofs.livejournal.com]

You know what makes me feel sick about the AFA article? That guy talking about "tolerance and diversity" as if they're bad words, a bad concept.

Ugh. Stop the world, I want to get off.

[gingembre.livejournal.com]

"Most Christians are now aware of what those code words mean," said AFA's chairman Don Wildmon. "If you are a person who accepts the homosexual lifestyle, then you are tolerant," he said. "If you don't, then you are a bigot who is motivated by ignorance and hate."

See, now, I totally agree with this statement. ;-)

[neurotica0.livejournal.com]

Seconded.

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

I think I've become your personal link pimp. *sighs*

[conuly]

Eh?

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Oh, it's just that you're constantly posting really interesting links that I want to share with others, so I post in my own journal.

[conuly]

Aw :)

[jedirita.livejournal.com]

I couldn't link to the article because I'm too lazy to subscribe to the news service. However, for what it's worth, I do think MLK would have supported gay rights. Of course, we all want MLK to agree with us, but I'd like to point out that two of his proteges, Jesse Jackson and Andrew Young, support gay rights. Also his South African counterparts, Desmond Tutu and Nelson Mandela, support gay rights. It seems absurd to suggest that those four men would have evolved in their thinking to support gay rights, yet MLK would not.

[eofs.livejournal.com]

Try this one. (http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/nationworld/articles/1355891.html)

[jedirita.livejournal.com]

Ah, thanks! That one worked.

[staircase-wit.livejournal.com]

I suppose it would be nice if he did, but does it matter if he didn't? If he didn't support gay rights, it would probably be due to a Biblical or civil excuse. Both excuses - that God condemns it or that it contributes to the "breakdown of the family and the erosion of traditional marriage" are ultimately overshadowed by his own adultry. God's condemnation of adultry is on the Short List of What God Wants (different lists are circulating, but I believe it's on every version of the Ten Commandments), and some people would consider adultry to be the erosion of traditional marriage... although others could argue convincingly that it is in fact a vital part of traditional marriage, given the statistics involved.

YMMV.

[codeman38.livejournal.com]

Incidentally, if you ever end up with an article from a Knight Ridder newspaper that requires registration (they all have the RealCities logo at the bottom), just change the domain name in the link to macon.com to avoid the registration prompt. (See? (http://www.macon.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/10661072.htm))

[ex-chaos-by-699.livejournal.com]

There's also BugMeNot (http://www.bugmenot.com). And it's also available as a Firefox extension where you can right-click on a registration form and it automatically fills in fake registration info for you. :)

[eofs.livejournal.com]

You know what makes me feel sick about the AFA article? That guy talking about "tolerance and diversity" as if they're bad words, a bad concept.

Ugh. Stop the world, I want to get off.

[gingembre.livejournal.com]

"Most Christians are now aware of what those code words mean," said AFA's chairman Don Wildmon. "If you are a person who accepts the homosexual lifestyle, then you are tolerant," he said. "If you don't, then you are a bigot who is motivated by ignorance and hate."

See, now, I totally agree with this statement. ;-)

[neurotica0.livejournal.com]

Seconded.

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

I think I've become your personal link pimp. *sighs*

[conuly]

Eh?

[tsukikage85.livejournal.com]

Oh, it's just that you're constantly posting really interesting links that I want to share with others, so I post in my own journal.

[conuly]

Aw :)