The 20 Most Frightful Anti-Gay Activists
It takes a certain kind of crazy to draw a connection between homosexuality and slavery. Luckily, Richard Land’s got insanity in spades. The Baptist leader foolishly believes that the gay marriage debate stands on the same federalist ground as the slavery debate.
The slavery analogy is apt when it comes to the marriage issue. America’s families — and the culture at large — cannot survive as a union of states with half embracing “same-sex marriage” and half accepting only traditional marriage. The U.S. government will not disintegrate, but eventually the nation will have one definition of marriage binding us all.
…
At least one person has said to me that while banning slavery expanded personal liberty, prohibiting “same-sex marriage” would contract or limit personal liberty. Yet while the ban on slavery expanded liberty for the slaves, it inhibited and constricted liberty for the slaveholders.
…
Forbidding same-sex couples from marrying may be a constriction of their liberty, but more importantly, it is an expansion of the people’s liberty to define what constitutes marriage.
So, not only is Land evil, he’s got democratic dyslexia. Gross!
Yes, Phyllis has a gay son who supports her ministry . Ditto for the gay son of Tim and Beverly La Haye.
The Canadian voices of spiritual violence were from the Roman Catholic hierarchy – now completely uberconservative reflecting the retirement and replacement of all liberals by the former and current pope. This majority voice was also joined by the fundamentalist and pentacostal voices in Western Canada.
We won the spiritual debate. How? Well, the Anglicans held the middle ground….but it was the United Church of Canada – who joined the MCC and many Quaker and Unitarian Universalist voices against these theocon luminaries who fought us in Canada…”so that they would not have to fight us in the streets of America” LOL
When Canada’s largest Protestant denomination was the loudest voice for LGBT marriage and civil rights, the secular activists – the pols and the jurists – could fight each other.
You do not fight the religious wrong with the legal right, but with the religious right…namely those who fight the theocons on their own turf.