Curious. Mr Blatt, not trying to hijack your blogpost, so feel free to edit as required.
If homosexuality is something O.K. (even if a large number of religiously conservative, not necessarily Christian folk think otherwise) and they should be loved (I agree that they should be shown ‘agape’ love, yes), then why should not those who disagree be shown the same ‘love’? If I disapprove of homosexuality, and someone disapproves of my disapproval, shouldn’t we be shown the same leeway, the same considerations? Notwithstanding ‘moral equivalence’, of course.
However, this is not the case. I am not anti-homosexual, just anti-homosexuality. Two different positions, no pun intended. And yet I find that the very same people ‘preaching’ diversity and tolerance do not tolerate my stance. Indeed curious.
Mr Blatt points out the obvious; the so-called ‘gay agenda’ is nothing of the sort, having (like so many other well-intentioned movements) been hijacked by people hell-bent on politicising it to death. Why this is not obvious to so many others is quite beyond my understanding.
My personal stance; get rid of ALL sexual innuendo in our public space. Let sexual matters recede to the private arena, where most people will agree they belong. No more blatant gay pride marches, BDSM fairs and festivals, Planned Promiscuity events. No using girls in bikinis to sell cars. Or beers, for that matter.
About choice: funny thing, though. Why do people choose alcohol? Or hard drugs? Or adultery? Because it makes them feel good for a while before dropping them into misery? No? Yet it starts with a chice – Yes or No.
You cannot say that people will always choose the ‘right’ path, or that if you do something that does not seem rational, it MUST be because you can’t help it, because obviously you would NEVER choose to do it. Lots of people make stupid choices and decisions all the time. Every now and then, with dire consequences.
Anyways, back to your scheduled programming.
