One that may be a hot-button issue, the social, and at times beaurocratic, pressure that is beginning to be applied to refer to same-sex couples as husband and husband or wife and wife is another.
Hmm. How is anyone actually oppressed by this, though? This pressure isn't causing anyone to have less access to economic, social, educational, political, housing, or employment opportunities, nor is it exposing anyone to abuse or exploitation. It doesn't threaten Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or any other theology -- except specifically those forms of theology that hold to strict scriptural literalism AND the impositon of the current literalistic interpretation on all of society. In short, the only thing being repressed is the "right" of religious conservatives to expect the continuation of privileges for heterosexuals.
there are many institutions that, in the name of political correctness and "sensitivity" actually prohibit saying "Merry Christmas"
I wasn't aware of that. I didn't think anyone could actually get away with imposing that sort of restriction.
or foster a culture that is highly hostile to it.
Well, it's not oppression yet, but i've studied enough history to know that it's worth being wary of replacing one oppression with another, as can sometimes happen. So i don't want to minimize that concern.
That said, the AFA has really poisoned the air, by bringing this issue up in a confrontational, accusative, and divisive way (rather than opening a dialogue), making it about money and profits. They're doing so in their fundraising letters of course. In their push to avoid any possibility of Christians being oppressed in the United States, they are promoting a return to a state of "presumed Christianity." Which is not, i'll wager, what Jesus had in mind at all.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2005-12-16 11:51 pm (UTC)Hmm. How is anyone actually oppressed by this, though? This pressure isn't causing anyone to have less access to economic, social, educational, political, housing, or employment opportunities, nor is it exposing anyone to abuse or exploitation. It doesn't threaten Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or any other theology -- except specifically those forms of theology that hold to strict scriptural literalism AND the impositon of the current literalistic interpretation on all of society. In short, the only thing being repressed is the "right" of religious conservatives to expect the continuation of privileges for heterosexuals.
there are many institutions that, in the name of political correctness and "sensitivity" actually prohibit saying "Merry Christmas"
I wasn't aware of that. I didn't think anyone could actually get away with imposing that sort of restriction.
or foster a culture that is highly hostile to it.
Well, it's not oppression yet, but i've studied enough history to know that it's worth being wary of replacing one oppression with another, as can sometimes happen. So i don't want to minimize that concern.
That said, the AFA has really poisoned the air, by bringing this issue up in a confrontational, accusative, and divisive way (rather than opening a dialogue), making it about money and profits. They're doing so in their fundraising letters of course. In their push to avoid any possibility of Christians being oppressed in the United States, they are promoting a return to a state of "presumed Christianity." Which is not, i'll wager, what Jesus had in mind at all.