GaysDefendMarriage on the air, in print, and in cyberspace
CommentsI will be a guest Friday morning, May 23 at 7:05 a.m. on Seattle’s conservative talk station, AM 570 KVI. (This is a reschedule from Tuesday.) I will be discussing this Web site and my thoughts about why LGBT people should stop devoting so many resources to the marriage issue.
The Web site also got a plug in a column I wrote in last Sunday’s LA Daily News. It’s called Same-sex ruling good for no one. From the column:
CHAMPAGNE corks are popping wherever gays and lesbians gather throughout the Golden State after the California Supreme Court’s ruling in In Re Marriage Cases, which opens the way for same-sex couples to legally wed beginning next month. But my fellow members of the LGBT community shouldn’t be celebrating. This decision does next to nothing for California gays and lesbians, and causes real harm to people who believe in the “old” definition of marriage. It’s nothing to be proud of.
A slightly different version of the piece is in the 9th largest-circulation local newspaper in the country, the Philadelphia Inquirer. They headlined it “For better or worse, a bad ruling.”
That piece also appeared in:
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer as “Why California gays shouldn’t celebrate state court ruling”
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel as “No ego boost is worth trading away fundamental liberties.”
We’ve also recently received plugs at National Review Online’s “The Corner” and of course, at MarriageDebate.com’s blog. And thank you to timesandseasons.org, which calls us “an awesomely contrarian website.”
You wrote in your article: “no lesbian in history has lost her assets, her job, or her freedom for writing, teaching, and running her business guided by her belief that marriage is a union of any two individuals who love each other.”
How would you describe Robin Shahar’s experience, where she was let go from her job at the Georgia state attorney general’s office specifically because her boss found out that she was going to have a Jewish religious wedding to another woman? It was quite a famous case - appealed all the way to the Supreme Court (who didn’t hear it - they let the lower court ruling stand saying that the firing was legal). Google Bowers v. Shahar for more.
Alex-
I am familiar wtih the Shahar case, one of many reasons Michael Bowers is a villain to LGBT people everywhere.
She did not lose her job for writing, teaching, or running a business using her beliefs. She lost it for a religious practice in her private life, and she should not have been fired for expressing her own religious beliefs about marriage, however much I disagree with them. Nor should I have to fear being sued for libel if I write on my blog that Ellen DeGeneres is not married to her girlfriend and never can be, because marriage is the union of a man and a woman.
Discovering the unknown…
As an evangelical Christian, when I discuss issues with those who have a different belief system I have to always remember that the other person is often operating from an ill-informed, media-driven stereotype. One of my favorite sites, Get Religion,…