Homosexuality is inherently repugnant to most heterosexuals, and viewed as deviant.
Yes, we are coming at this from two different frames of reference. Coming at it from your perspective I can see how tolerance seems fair, even magnanimous to you. If you try to think your way past the initial "yuck" visceral reaction, though, the reaction dissipates and you don't have to make en effort to tolerate. You just accept. You have to want to do that, though. Sort of like eating your first raw oyster or trekking through your first mud flat.
and presses the idea that we cannot really judge anyone's proclivities
I still say that, while we can personally judge other people's behavior all we want, it's wrong for our government to treat people as second class citizens so long as their behavior don't damage anyone. MYOB unless someone is in danger is a standard of behavior I'd like to see promoted.
As for the symbolism of marriage, I understand the desire to restore it to what, with rose colored glasses, we think it used to be. I've suggested ways to deal with that. We can have religious and equivalent institutions sanction "marriages" and we can have the government either get out of the marriage business altogether or award a "civil union" to couples when they get married and offer it also to couples who don't qualify for marriage. That way the marriage retains its integrity but everyone can participate in family building. What I'm finding increasingly difficult to accept is the status quo, which hypocritically tolerates all sorts of deviations from the ideal of marriage for all sorts of reasons and for all sorts of people but insists on drawing the line at homosexuals. We should all be equal when it comes to our freedom to form families. |
