Mickey Posted December 6, 2004 Posted December 6, 2004 Yes, but the radical gay-loving left should not have the right to force a denomination to accept a lesbian as a minister. 144112[/snapback] It is the congregation that wants her, not the "radical gay-loving left", whoever that is. Who is on the other side of that paranoid delusion, the "salt of the earth gay hating right"? First we were "!@#$ lovers" now we are "gay lovers" the issues change but the denigrating, dehumanizing rhetoric remains the same. I don't think my general support for the idea that all Americans deserve to have their civil rights protected, even if they are gay, makes me a "radical gay-lover" anymore than being opposed to gay marriage makes someone a gay hating lunatic.
Alaska Darin Posted December 6, 2004 Posted December 6, 2004 It is the congregation that wants her, not the "radical gay-loving left", whoever that is. Who is on the other side of that paranoid delusion, the "salt of the earth gay hating right"? First we were "!@#$ lovers" now we are "gay lovers" the issues change but the denigrating, dehumanizing rhetoric remains the same. I don't think my general support for the idea that all Americans deserve to have their civil rights protected, even if they are gay, makes me a "radical gay-lover" anymore than being opposed to gay marriage makes someone a gay hating lunatic. 148980[/snapback] That's too many words. No way we're going to get a good soundbyte out of that.
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted December 6, 2004 Posted December 6, 2004 First we were "!@#$ lovers" now we are "gay lovers" the issues change but the denigrating, dehumanizing rhetoric remains the same. 148980[/snapback] Cute, but wrong. Race and sexual PREFERENCE are two completely different things. Nice try, Mick.
IUBillsFan Posted December 6, 2004 Posted December 6, 2004 It is the congregation that wants her, not the "radical gay-loving left", whoever that is. Who is on the other side of that paranoid delusion, the "salt of the earth gay hating right"? First we were "!@#$ lovers" now we are "gay lovers" the issues change but the denigrating, dehumanizing rhetoric remains the same. I don't think my general support for the idea that all Americans deserve to have their civil rights protected, even if they are gay, makes me a "radical gay-lover" anymore than being opposed to gay marriage makes someone a gay hating lunatic. 148980[/snapback] The problem IMO is the congregation is part of a larger organization and so far that organization has rules against gay clergy.
nobody Posted December 8, 2004 Posted December 8, 2004 The problem IMO is the congregation is part of a larger organization and so far that organization has rules against gay clergy. 149022[/snapback] Based on the article - there is not a rule against gay clergy but a rule against being a practicing homosexual. Quite different.
Recommended Posts