I think that conservatives might be less hostile to gays if the issue really were simply about what people do in the privacy of their bedroom. However, gay activists aren't content with privacy and frequently try to use the courts to force their bedroom onto the rest of us.
A lawsuit filed by a Northern California lesbian against dating service eHarmony represents the types of excesses of the gay movement which do so much damage to their efforts to achieve public acceptance.According to the Reuters article linked above, eHarmony "has long rankled the gay community with its failure to offer a 'men seeking men' or 'women seeking women' option."
So a gay activist is suing a private company for choosing not to offer a certain service. I suppose I should sue Jack-in-the-Box for not serving Big Macs! Maybe it's time for conservatives to put the shoe on the other foot....
Could you imagine the outcry from gays if someone tried to force a gay website to provide dating services for heterosexuals? Or a religious group that promotes heterosexual marriage demanding a float in a gay pride parade?
The lawsuit is a ludicrous charade that highlights the why gays haven't attained the "acceptance" they claim to want; despite their claims, gays don't simply want tolerance (to which they are entitled), they crave affirmation. Get over it.
I think the lawsuit is silly, but I disagree with your assessment about what it would take to ramp down conservative hostility toward gays.
Most of the conservatives for whom religious beliefs are paramount will not be content with anything but repression of gay people and gay culture. Only conservatives with libertarian considerations can be content.
MW: I do have to ask, though.. is this article a call to action or simply commentary? If it's the former, what action do you suggest?
Mark
It's simple. You vote against those that promote and protect this kind of "Gay Rights", namely Democrats.
II: Promote and protect what, though? People filing lawsuits? Last time I checked, people are able to file lawsuits. Are you advocating restriction of that right?
Mark, being a fairly conservative person and living in a fairly conservative state, and thus knowing a goodly number of conservative people, I have to wonder how many you personally know that want "repression of gay people and gay culture" because I don't see that, even at the Southern Baptist church my wife goes to.
But, let's put the shoe on the other foot, because that's usually a good way to smoke out biases. Would you support a lawsuit by a straight person to force a gays-only dating service to cater to straights?
eHarmony's purpose is to find matches that will result in marriage, not just to be another dating site. This is obvious from their commercials on TV, which emphasise their success at matches that result in marriages. Given that gay people can't get married legally, it would be counterproductive for eHarmony at this time to cater to gays!
RC: Perhaps you missed the part of my first comment where I said that I thought this lawsuit is silly. I don't support the lawsuit, so no.. I wouldn't support the hypothetical lawsuit you mentioned, either. My other question remains unanswered, though. What, exactly, does MW think should be done about this; what action is he calling for? Or is it simply commentary? Ivan talked about not supporting politicians who protect and promote these kinds of "gay rights", to which I asked promote and protect what? This is a ridiculous lawsuit, but guess what? They file more of them all the time for a lot of different reasons. If someone would like to propose dealing with stupid lawsuits, that's fine.. but let's be honest: 99+% of them have nothing to do with "gay rights".
I'm a fairly middle-of-the-road person living in a fairly middle-of-the-road state, but I know quite a few conservative people because I don't live in the "liberal" parts of the state. I know quite a few people who are like the Fred Phelps and would have no issues holding up "God hates fags" signs, etc.
.. and by "they file more of them all the time", I wasn't referring to gay activists, but to the general public.
Mark, FWIW, the only person I know who'd get on board the "God Hates Fags" is the damn cracker running the Confederate memorabilia store at the local flea market, and as far as I can tell very few people even patronize him. Oh, and I know one other guy, and ex-military guy, but he's a little strange.
I suspect "loser pays" would go a long way towards solving the problem of frivolous lawsuits