Skip to main content

Colby Melvin (L) and Brandon Brown embrace after the U.S. Supreme court ruled on California's Proposition 8 and the federal Defense of Marriage Act, at The Abbey in West Hollywood, California June 26, 2013. REUTERS/Jonathan Alcorn
Love is winning
Evangelicals shouldn't give up on turning the tide against marriage equality, according to the president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission. But they do need to recognize how much ground they've lost, and why, in assessing where to go next. "I don't think we can say, let's just stop the conversation about what marriage ought to be and focus simply on the question of religious liberty," Russell Moore told Jon Ward, "because I think the religious liberty argument itself entails an articulation of why we believe these things are significant and important in terms of the public good."
When the prevailing cultural narrative is that people who believe that marriage is a man-woman union are the equivalent of white supremacists or segregationists, then—that's not true, first of all. Second of all, we can't simply say, 'Well, let's just assume that we are and let's protect our religious liberty.' I think we have to work to protect our religious liberty while at the same time we are articulating why this is a reasonable view to have.
Moore appears to be starting from a mostly realistic assessment of the current political landscape, understanding that anti-equality evangelicals "ignor[ed] the cultural efforts that same-sex marriage proponents were giving their energy to, and ignor[ed] some of the legal undercurrents" and now face a drastic erosion of their position. He recognizes that getting back to widespread opposition to marriage equality would not be a matter of electing a Republican president or passing a law, that it would take a serious long-term fight. Which ... yeah, you think? But the place where his assessment of the current landscape seems most off is perhaps the most crucial to his project of shifting the culture back against marriage equality: young evangelicals.
... there are some in the secular media, again, who don't know many evangelicals who assume all of your young people are embracing same-sex marriage. That's really not even the case. It's not even true, once one looks at actual conservative evangelicals who actually go to church. If anything, I find that they're even more committed to a robustly Christian sexual ethic because they've spent their entire lives articulating a Christian vision of reality over and against the world views of their peers.
That may be true of many young evangelicals, but polling shows it's a shrinking number, relative to older generations:
White evangelical Protestant millennials are more than twice as likely to favor same-sex marriage as the oldest generation of white evangelical Protestants (43% vs. 19%).
Granted that's a much, much lower level of support than other young people express, but it represents a major generational shift among evangelicals. And you're not going to launch and win a culture war if your young people are moving away from you.

Originally posted to Laura Clawson on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:01 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Asdf (8+ / 0-)

    Just what, exactly, does he think they are going to "do about ti" once the SCOTUS finally formalises it?

    The best way to tell a Democrat from a Republican is to present someone requiring food and shelter. The Democrat will want them housed and fed, even if they be faking need. The Republican will gladly see them starve until all doubt is removed.

    by GayIthacan on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:09:26 AM PDT

    •  the fringier ones will wink-wink condone (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      prettygirlxoxoxo, tuesdayschilde

      violence, or advocate it outright . . . just as they do regarding their brethren in Uganda, just as they do the attacks on abortion clinics and their personnel and clients in the USA.

      Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

      by corvo on Thu May 22, 2014 at 08:10:40 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Supreme Court imprimatur on Choice . . . (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      commonmass, prettygirlxoxoxo

      has done little to dampen the zeal of the hard-core, radical religious right on that issue, so I doubt it is likely to have much of an effect on their attitudes on this one either.

  •  The speed of the collapse...sorta like a dam (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, Wee Mama, Vita Brevis, commonmass

    giving way......We await the inevitable backlash with a ZZZZZZZZZ.

  •  Hey Russ, why not try doing what Jesus (4+ / 0-)

    commanded you to do instead?

    Love one another.

    if a gay person felt it was wrong they might be more attracted to your ideas if you were not a colossal douche, but the way.

    "The poor can never be made to suffer enough." Jimmy Breslin

    by merrywidow on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:12:55 AM PDT

  •  Flew into PA last night, and awoke this morning (11+ / 0-)

    to a newspaper front page with a huge photo of marriage equality advocates celebrating. In the land of Rick Santorum no less ... congrats Keystone State! Someone tell Mr. Moore he still has "religious liberty" -- he's free not to marry another man.

    stay together / learn the flowers / go light - Gary Snyder

    by Mother Mags on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:14:39 AM PDT

    •  hey Rick recommended this judge for his position (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Mother Mags

      I expected to see headlines that Rick had been found hanging from a rafter with his throat cut, his wrists slit and a gunshot to his temple when that news came out.

      In Rick's hyper-Catholicism,  doesn't recommending this judge lead to perpetual damnation?

  •  Who is saying this? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sfbob, JML9999, jayden, Yellow Canary
    When the prevailing cultural narrative is that people who believe that marriage is a man-woman union are the equivalent of white supremacists or segregationists
    Typical right wing projection.  No one I hear/read is equating marriage equality with any racial issues.  Where do they come up with this non-sequitor?

    Sure, there are parallels between the civil rights movement and the marriage equality movement, and true opponents of both are fairly labeled a s bigots.  But true to RWNJ form, they conflate one type of bigotry (homophobia) with another (racism).

  •  Founded In Response to Racial Integration, (10+ / 0-)

    they had to finally disown their founding purpose, now they're seeing another major social crusade of theirs losing.

    Someone's tapping you on the shoulder, Baptists. It may be the prophet who said this about racial segregation and gay marriage: "."

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:22:52 AM PDT

    •  they gave it the good old college try (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Trotting out various African American ministers to explain why gay rights were not like civil rights at all  

      •  One of the most sickening things (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        old mule, Vita Brevis, entlord

        I ever watched in the SBC: a Voddie Baucham video about how all anti-bullying and hate crime legislation is wrong, because it's all about those icky gays.

        1) At the time the video was produced, almost no hate crime and no anti-bullying legislation included sexual orientation as a protected class.

        2) He's an African-American preacher in a Baptist church. In the freaking SOUTH. Voddie Baucham personally is EXACTLY the population subgroup all those things he was speaking against are designed to PROTECT. Un- and under-investigated attacks on majority-black churches? One of the original major reasons people wanted those laws in the first place.

  •  Why does this remind me of (9+ / 0-)

    the scene in "Oh, Brother, where art thou?" where the Klanner comes into the performance by the Foggy Bottom Boys and shouts "They is miscegenated!"?

    He is using a tea cup to hold back a flood.  If his Bible taught him anything it should be to build an ark.

    Rush — the quivering rage heap who is apparently desperately trying to extinguish any remaining molecule of humanity that might still reside in the Chernobyl-esque Superfund cleanup site that was his soul. -- Jon Stewart

    by Its the Supreme Court Stupid on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:23:26 AM PDT

  •  Tilting at windmills (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Sounds a lot more noble coming from Don Quixote than from Mr. Moore.

    He'll probably be achieve about the same level of successful, though.

  •  Southern Baptist Ethics&Religious Liberty Commis (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vita Brevis


     Need a new name not remotely acronymish

    I want 1 less Tiny Coffin, Why Don't You? Support The President's Gun Violence Plan.

    by JML9999 on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:26:22 AM PDT

  •  The Sacrament of Marriage (7+ / 0-)

    When you spend so much time promoting the joys of marriage as a true extension of love by god's grace to your youth who then see their religious political leaders, deacons, pastors getting divorced, cheating, fighting, remarrying, cheating, fighting...

    ...then contrast that with those LGBT couples who have proven their devotion to each other and demonstrated that grace of love, you have to scratch your head and say "Well, why not?"  

    And that's when young evangelicals who meet out gays who want to marry each other confront the hypocrisy in their parents and churches' opposition to (certain) marriage (equity) and find it untrue.

    It's one thing to prohibit and condemn sexual promiscuity (in all sexual orientations), it's another to condemn and prohibit promise, love, and devotion.

    As a structural political strategy, it doesn't make market because it's inconsistent.

    "Out of Many, One Nation." This is the great promise of these United States of America -9.75 -6.87

    by Uncle Moji on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:39:17 AM PDT

  •  Imposing your religious beliefs on society ... (10+ / 0-)

    as a whole is not an act of protecting your religious liberties. Believing that you have the right to deny same sex marriage to others is equivalent to you fighting for the right to deny a Muslim their right to worship as they choose, because it is in conflict with your evangelical Christian beliefs. Muslims have the right to worship in America. Gays have the right to marry in America.

    If music be the food of love, then laughter is its queen, and likewise, if behind is in front, then dirt in truth is clean.

    by glb3 on Thu May 22, 2014 at 07:48:25 AM PDT

    •  actually, the original colonies (0+ / 0-)

      were settled largely by people who equated "religious liberty" with the right to persecute heretics and members of other religions.

      You can't say there isn't precedent -- and tradition.

      Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

      by corvo on Thu May 22, 2014 at 08:12:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bullseye (0+ / 0-)

        Amazing how believers so often interpret simple non-belief (or heresies) as attacks (or hate speech).  Cognitive dissonance much?  That isn't how people who are secure in their beliefs act.

        I'm secure in my belief in evolution -- a belief that has objective (meets "inter-subjective") basis -- because I grasp the science to a pretty good extent and have observed that science works.  I know some people disagree, but I feel safe saying they're clueless.

        I'm secure in my belief in humanism -- a belief that is a choice -- because, on the whole, it seems like a really good idea.  Not much more to say there.  To the extent people think other stuff is more important, I try to encourage them to at least put human well-being well up there in their value-hierarchy even if they can't bring themselves to put it at the top.

        I used to believe in one or another religious idea; my beliefs morphed over time and finally switched into atheism (though I am not a "proselytizing atheist").  Interestingly, I was NOT as secure in my religious beliefs as I am in the others mentioned above.   Deep down, in some corner of one's mind, one know one can't be sure. I can't help but think most believers experience doubt, assuming they're mostly rational in other spheres of life, which one generally has to be in order to survive.  (Indeed, one of the necessary memes in a religious meme-complex is a doubt-suppression meme of some kind.)

        I've always been a strong believer in religious freedom of the genuinely First Amendment variety.  I never believed in authoritarianism, and never took the big cognitive dissonance leap that leads people to try to force others to accept their own religious codes of conduct.  But I do remember the nagging doubt.

        One can only hope that the doubt and cognitive dissonance of authoritarian evangelicals will at some point reach the breaking point in a positive way, and they'll have an epiphany about what religious freedom really means in terms of freedom of choice.  One way to help bring this about, I guess, is to "proselytize by example" and show that one can be a decent, rational, tolerant person without rigid beliefs.

        But it's always gonna be a tough nut to crack in America, given the memes of those who settled here, as you mentioned.

        Thanks for mini-rant catalyst ;-)

        "Happiness is the only good. The place to be happy is here. The time to be happy is now. The way to be happy is to make others so." - Robert Ingersoll

        by dackmont on Sun May 25, 2014 at 12:06:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  The fight for the heart and soul of America (0+ / 0-)

    goes on as Evangelicals continue various strategies to make sure the US lives up to Rushdoony's dream:

  •  43% of Evangelical Millennials favor (0+ / 0-)

    marriage equality. And that percentage is likely to increase.

    The end is near. And I mean that in a good way :P

  •  I remember when my mother (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vita Brevis

    stopped being referred to as "Mrs. Husband's First and Last Name" and began using her own married name. It wasn't all that long ago. Traditions and customs change as society evolves and often for the better of everyone involved and for that we can all be thankful.

    Mr. Moore and his followers can wallow in their religious liberty as long as it doesn't keep the rest of us from enjoying our lives in peace and happiness.

  •  I predict more religious indoctrination, isolation (0+ / 0-)

    I'd bet that many of those counter-trending anti-gay millenials were home schooled and/or attended private religious schools, where adults have complete control over the dogma poured into their children's heads. That sort of isolation and control are the only way to prevail against the views of society at large.

    Like any other religious cult with beliefs increasingly opposed by mainstream culture, these extremists will have to decide whether to change their own beliefs or isolate themselves further to maintain a viable community. The Mormons had a schism like this when pressured to give up polygyny. The main church gave in and banned it, but many extremist factions splintered off and are still practicing polygyny and patriarchal culture in isolated communities.

    "Tell the truth and run." -- Yugoslav proverb

    by quill on Thu May 22, 2014 at 08:21:27 AM PDT

  •  Why is this far off Mr. Moore (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    old mule
    When the prevailing cultural narrative is that people who believe that marriage is a man-woman union are the equivalent of white supremacists or segregationists, then—that's not true, first of all.
    Your sect was founded in whole or in part to justify / preserve slavery.

    Pretty sure you all were just a little invested in Jim Crow and not so invested in the fight for equality during  the Civil Rights years.

    Gonna guess that if you lift a white hood, you'll find a SB or evangelical.

    Fairly confident that you and your fellow travelers weren't celebrating the Loving decision in 1967 that made marriage like mine legal in all 50 states.

    Doesn't seem like your actions have changed much, just the object of them. So do tell...why exactly is this not a fair comparison?

    We view "The Handmaid's Tale" as cautionary. The GOP views it as an instruction book.

    by Vita Brevis on Thu May 22, 2014 at 08:29:20 AM PDT

  •  When people are free to live their lives ... (0+ / 0-)

    ... as they see fit, as long as they don't harm others, religions based on norms of obedience will have to radically change in order to survive.

    Religionists whose institutional structures are based on norms of obedience correctly see this as an existential fight.

    Vote rape. Vote torture. Vote War Crimes. Vote with the American top 1%.

    by Yellow Canary on Thu May 22, 2014 at 08:37:56 AM PDT

  •  Society is evolving. He hasn't got a prayer. nt (0+ / 0-)
  •  These people will not be going away, however, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vita Brevis

    it is my sincere hope that they all live long enough to be able to feel the defeat and humiliation which belongs to being on the wrong side of history.

    Maggie Gallagher is already getting a taste of it herself, based on a recent article she wrote.


    by commonmass on Thu May 22, 2014 at 09:03:32 AM PDT

  •  the diarist (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Vita Brevis

    up there is being real nice to Moore, giving his views a fair hearing and treating him respectfully.
    Pretty nice of him considering that Moore's sect would have gays' civil rights completely stripped, and have them  imprisoned or worse, and I do mean worse.
    Sometimes when I see those old lynching postcards I wonder about the faces in the crowds. I have never seen nor read one instance of repentance. These anti-gay people are going to go to their graves in the iron grip of hatred.

    I buy and sell well trained riding mules and American Mammoth Jack Stock.

    by old mule on Thu May 22, 2014 at 09:53:06 AM PDT

  •  Time to throw in the towel, ditches think (0+ / 0-)

    In loyalty to their kind, they cannot tolerate our minds. In loyalty to our kind, We cannot tolerate their obstruction.

    by mojave mike on Thu May 22, 2014 at 10:08:21 AM PDT

  •  i've been reading those parts of the bible where (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annieli, wishingwell, anon004

    jesus spoke out on gay marriage and gave his followers direction on the subject...

    oh, no i haven't because it's not in there...these people just make shit up

  •  I absolutely love that picture. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat

    I'm so envious!! :D

  •  But left-handed who live at church and wear plaid! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat, anon004, gffish

    When you have to define your data set to win, you're losing... badly.

    The real data is not very surprising when the guy your entire faith is supposedly based on said absolutely zero about gays but hung with every outcast group he could find.

    But take heart Haters, soon you will be the marginalized outcast group... who am I kidding, the uber rich will always be willing fund the bribery and brainwashing of those driven by fear, loss or confusion.  And the 'leaders' of those poor souls will always be willing to sell them out for 30 pieces of silver.

  •  code for more missionary position cowbell (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jay C
    If anything, I find that they're even more committed to a robustly Christian sexual ethic because they've spent their entire lives articulating a Christian vision of reality over and against the world views of their peers.
    Some scholars may prefer the theory of articulation, where "class does not coincide with the sign community", to the theory of homology, where class does coincide with the sign community and where economic forces determine the superstructure. However, "it seems likely that some signifying structures are more easily articulated to the interests of one group than are some others" and cross-connotation, "when two or more different elements are made to connote, symbolize, or evoke each other", can set up "particularly strong articulative relationships". For example: Elvis Presley's linking of elements of "youth rebellion, working-class 'earthiness', and ethnic 'roots', each of which can evoke the others, all of which were articulated together, however briefly, by a moment of popular self-assertion".

    Warning - some snark may be above‽ (-9.50; -7.03)‽ eState4Column5©2013 "If we appear to seek the unattainable, then let it be known that we do so to avoid the unimaginable." (@eState4Column5)

    by annieli on Sat May 24, 2014 at 04:28:49 PM PDT

  •  It shouldn't make one lick of difference (7+ / 0-)

    what the evangelicals want -- the issue is civil marriage, that all people have equal protections under law. Religions/churches will still be free to not perform same-sex marriages, just as some churches don't perform marriages involving people not of their faith (you're not going to see a non-Mormon get married in the Temple, even if s/he is marrying a Mormon). Even now, you're not going to see a same-sex wedding at St. Mary's Cathedral (Catholic), but no problem at Grace Cathedral (Episcopal).

    There's only one rule that I know of, babies -- goddammit, you've got to be kind. -- Kurt Vonnegut

    by Cali Scribe on Sat May 24, 2014 at 04:38:23 PM PDT

    •  All that's true... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      anon004, gffish

      ...but they don't care.

      I can't say whether it's an attitude applying to all who'd describe themselves as "evangelicals," but it's observably true that this is one that applies to their vocal activist representatives:

      "Don't do anything I wouldn't do...and if you try, I'll stop you."

      That's the situation in a nut. About anything else - civil vs religious, equality before the law, what have you - they just don't care.  

  •  When are these assholes going to get (5+ / 0-)

    the difference between "religious liberty", i.e., freedom to practice, or not practice, whatever religion you want to, and imposing your religious views on others??

    Freedom of religion is not for Christians only.

    Mediocrity cannot know excellence ~ Sherlock Holmes

    by La Gitane on Sat May 24, 2014 at 04:48:20 PM PDT

  •  I have never wanted to oppose by GOD on anyone BUT (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Aunt Pat

    I believe in the GOD of the accelerating mass, of strings, relativity, quantum mechanics, evolution, DNA and LOVE.  .  You can have your omnipotent, omniscient GOD of creationism.  What we may share is the omnipresent manifestation.   GOD does not care why do you?  I believe Jesus to be an outstanding human, a great teacher, a sign of what is humanly possible, but not a god.  As he called himself a "Son of Man".  Opposing your will, ideas, believes on other is not GOD's will but your will, insecurities and vulnerability.    

  •  Evangelicals will find a new group to hate-on (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, apimomfan2, gffish

    even before marriage equality is the law all over America.
    From what I understand, their deity agrees with them.
    It seems gawd is very unhappy if everyone has equal rights.

  •  Their approach relies on "do as I say". (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, apimomfan2, anon004

    That's their notion of religious liberty.  It's not enough that they can choose not to marry a same sex person, their religious liberty requires they have the mandate to restrict or dictate to other people what their beliefs should be.

    The only thing we have to fear is fear itself - FDR. Obama Nation. -6.13 -6.15

    by ecostar on Sat May 24, 2014 at 05:11:24 PM PDT

  •  Face it, boys (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, OldDragon

    You picked a fight 20 years ago, when it looked like easy pickings. You had it your way for about 15 years. But you didn't have the belly for it. This fight isn't over until we say it's over, and it isn't over until we win.

    Next time you're traipsing through the Bible, read Luke 14:31, and see where Jesus said you went wrong.

  •  A clarification, I presume (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Jay C, gffish

    (Meaning I'm going to be presumptuous.)

    "When the prevailing cultural narrative is that people who believe that marriage is a man-woman union are the equivalent of white supremacists or segregationists, then—that's not true, first of all."
    And you characterize him as starting from
    "a mostly realistic assessment of the current political landscape?"
    I assume you mean that he begins by realizing the Pew Centers polling can't be "unskewed." However, he actually begins with the same bull-flop as many of his fellows do. He begins by saying that "the media" and "liberals" equate all those who believe that heterosexual marriage is normal with being intolerant. That's not only not true, it's yet more of the special pleading and victim addiction common on the right.

    I don't care if he believes heterosexual marriages are the real marriages or not. You shouldn't care if I do. What we all care about -- and this is the distinction lost on him -- is whether a person is intolerant of another person's right to marry. Gays should not be intolerant of heterosexual rights to marry, and vice versa. Beyond that, we're all free to believe that X or Y or XY, XX, YY is the "definition of marriage."

    "man, proud man,/ Drest in a little brief authority,. . . Plays such fantastic tricks before high heaven/ As make the angels weep; who, with our spleens,/ Would all themselves laugh mortal." -- Shakespeare, Measure for Measure II ii, 117-23

    by The Geogre on Sat May 24, 2014 at 05:40:21 PM PDT

  •  "Reasonable views" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    apimomfan2, anon004
    I think we have to work to protect our religious liberty while at the same time we are articulating why this is a reasonable view to have.
    That's the core of the problem: for most of the Religious Right: the reflexive antipathy toward gays, and SSM, by extension, doesn;t really lend itself to a "reasonable" defense. At least when it comes from the major American anti-gay "Family" organizations which are the backbone of the reactionary fight: their objections, in essence boil down to just two tropes: "Ewww, gays are icky", and "Ewww, gays are icky because God says so".

    All but the most hardcore homophobes shy away from using the first "rationale" - not least because (however tricked-up with obfuscatory language) it sounds rock-bottom stupid: all they have left is the religious basis: and that - at least in this country, thank Whoever - isn't really a solid basis for formulating public policy: not as long as "religion" and "governance" - despite the moralistic wishful-thinking of the Holy Hate crowd - are (technically) separate spheres. A technicality which the Marriage Equality movement has been extremely fortunate in exploiting....  

  •  Good Luck With That (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, OldDragon, apimomfan2, anon004
    I think we have to work to protect our religious liberty while at the same time we are articulating why this is a reasonable view to have.
    Tough to sound reasonable claiming that allowing gay marriage threatens heterosexual marriage. Tough nut to crack. Maybe there is a media communication wizard who wants a challenge.
  •  One thing I'll never underestimate... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    apimomfan2, AJayne the forces of regression's ability to - no, make that "talent for" - dreaming up and implementing "new tactics."

    Took 'em nearly 40 years after Roe v Wade - with intervening but ultimately ineffectual decades of intimidation and violence - to come up with trap laws, and nearly a half century after the Voting Rights Act for registration-purging and voter I.D.

    I cling to one possibility: by the time they figure equally effective ways to interfere with same-sex marriage equality, it'll be so ingrained in our culture - as is interracial marriage 47 years after Loving - that they simply won't have the motivation to attempt them.

    But if they decide to just the same, count on one thing: they'll be creative.

  •  US Evangelicals have been proselytizing their HATE (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, AJayne

    to Africa and Russia.

    That's why Russia, Uganda, Nigeria, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and others, have begun rounding up their gay people, to murder and imprison.

    There is strong rumor that "THE FAMILY," a shadowy far rightwing pseudo religious Cult that runs the Presidents Prayer Breakfast and owns DC's infamous "Frathouse for Jeses," had a hand in authoring Uganda's KILL THE GAYS bill.

  •  The ultimate problem with their (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, AJayne

    position and why they will lose is that they want to impose their religious beliefs by law in the absence of any public policy goals.  If they could articulate why marriage equality is bad from a public policy standpoint, they could at least make a case.  When you're only arguments are:  "I personally find gay sex icky," "We've always done it this way," and "God says so" (And even that's based upon very shaky theological ground), you really can't make much headway in any place but Iran.

  •  Evangelical Leaders: New tactics (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gffish, MrJersey, AJayne

    "...major generational shift among evangelicals. And you're not going to launch and win a culture war if your young people are moving away from you."

    The so-called Evangelical Leaders know and fully understand that this is a lost cause, but they still keep appealing to the older folks and semi-blackmail them into writing checks or bequeath a portion of property or trust or money to these evangelical parasites. How and why do you think that these tax-free churches manage to get prime property?

  •  This guy would have to show how same sex (0+ / 0-)

    marriage hurts him directly.  Other than that he personally feels the eeech factor, what societal harm does the personal declaration of loving people bonding with other loving people have upon him personally?

    If it doesn't harm him personally, it is time for him to STFU.

    And it feels like I'm livin'in the wasteland of the free ~ Iris DeMent, 1996

    by MrJersey on Sat May 24, 2014 at 09:32:44 PM PDT

  •  "Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty" (0+ / 0-)

    Isn't that an oxymoron?

  •  What really gets me is the confusion these people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    happy camper

    express when they say they are protecting their "religious liberty."

    Their religious liberty consists of refraining from same sex marriage, teaching against same sex marriage from their pulpits, and refusing to recognize same sex marriage in their congregations.

    None of that has been compromised in the least by acknowledging the civil rights of same sex couples by the (supposedly) secular government.

    What they really mean, whether they realize it or not, is that they want to stroke their religious "sensitivities" by denying the same civil rights they enjoy from those who disagree with them.

    Unfortunately, regardless of their setbacks in the legal system, their homophobia will continue unabated, just as anti-semitism and prejudice against various other minorities has continued well after the laws intended to protect them were enacted.

    The question is, how long will it take them to realize that they are as bigoted as their predecessors who preached the biblical approval of slavery?  When will they realize that "Judge not lest ye be judged" is speaking directly to them?

    Not in this generation, possibly never.  We can't do anything about that.  All we can do is fight to prevent the theocracy they so desperately seek.

    Ted Cruz president? Pardon my Vietnamese, but Ngo Pho King Way.

    by ZedMont on Sun May 25, 2014 at 05:13:52 AM PDT

  •  I don't get it... (0+ / 0-)

    how can these people feel so threatened by someone they don't know doing something that, while they may not like it, has absolutely no effect on their own personal lives? Does the entire world have to conform to their views in order for them to feel validated?

    If only this concern for the lives of others carried over to such things as economic justice...

    "A lie is not the other side of a story; it's just a lie."

    by happy camper on Sun May 25, 2014 at 05:45:27 AM PDT

    •  The answer to your second question is, (0+ / 0-)

      unfortunately, "Yes".  They "believe".  Therefore, the rest of the world also has to "believe" as they do.  And, of course, along with the "belief" must come complete conformity with their external behavior as well.

      it is not a matter of THEM "feeling validated".  Rather, it is a matter of ALL OTHERS having to "become validated" according to "Evangelical beliefs".  Which, considering the simple facts that most, if not all, the major areas of their "beliefs" come from the long ago discredited and disproved source of the Hebrew Mythology Book, forces them to always seek a reactionary, regressive, and retrograde approach to today's world.

      They have been told - and are constantly being told - that , among other things, the world is "young", having been created about 6,000, or so, years ago; since the Hebrew Mythology Book came into existence at the time oral transmissions of legenda were being then newly transcribed into squiggles and marks that others could "read".  And, since the myth speaks of "7 days", so too must the "BELIEVER believe".  The sciences - and development of such as the Theory of Evolution - have to be "wrong"; since they are not absolutely in accord with the wording of the written myths.  So forth - to save time, and spare a boring re-hash of superstitious ignorance and arrogantly stubborn stupidity.

      The power of "belief" - especially as peddled by today's "Evangelical" Jackasses-in-the-Pulpit - is almost impossible to describe in rational terms.  It is YOU who MUST BELIEVE THEM!  Not at all the "other way round".  And, sad to say, there are those very weak intellects who, in the end, DO "believe"; and then approach the rest of the world accordingly.

      The "believer" cannot, ever, concern him/her self with such things as "economic justice" - or any other, or all, of the  problems, ills, and troubles of the REAL WORLD.  His/her sole and only concern must be to focus on changing everyone else's "beliefs" to conform to his/her own.  And of course, the other continuous corollary is, simply, that the "believer" is always threatened by anyone who does not immediately "believe"; thus giving rise to the "believer's" offensive defensiveness, as manifested in the nonsensical bloviation above.

      There really is NO rational, reasonable, intelligent, or thoughtful alternative to "Evangelical belief".

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site