Yes, I thought that was just bizarre--especially since, as I said above, in the other storyline we had a sheriff sort of treating the black person in front of him like an alien. And what exactly was one supposed to go about "giving people time?" Obviously 400 years isn't enough!
I've had a lot of discussions with people who genuinely believe gay marriage is wrong, both the people who think homosexuality should be outlawed and punished by hell and those who just don't like the word marriage applied to people with relationships that are different from their own. And I admit their arguments are no more logical than Harry's and they often feel like denial (I've yet to meet anybody who said something was wrong "because the Bible said so" who wasn't really happy the Bible did say so), but I doubt they'd understand Harry's pov either. It was like they were trying to have her argue from the middle, saying, "You just have to give my people time, and then of course they'll come around to your correct pov!" Even her "I can't be the one to judge!" was ridiculous--of course she can be the one to judge. Based on what she's said she's perfectly comfortable judging homosexuality as wrong with the Bible for her defense. So why was she telling Matt she was going with the politician's answers of "I don't know." Isn't it understood that politicians say that to avoid losing votes rather than because it's their sincerely held belief?
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-11-14 05:22 pm (UTC)I've had a lot of discussions with people who genuinely believe gay marriage is wrong, both the people who think homosexuality should be outlawed and punished by hell and those who just don't like the word marriage applied to people with relationships that are different from their own. And I admit their arguments are no more logical than Harry's and they often feel like denial (I've yet to meet anybody who said something was wrong "because the Bible said so" who wasn't really happy the Bible did say so), but I doubt they'd understand Harry's pov either. It was like they were trying to have her argue from the middle, saying, "You just have to give my people time, and then of course they'll come around to your correct pov!" Even her "I can't be the one to judge!" was ridiculous--of course she can be the one to judge. Based on what she's said she's perfectly comfortable judging homosexuality as wrong with the Bible for her defense. So why was she telling Matt she was going with the politician's answers of "I don't know." Isn't it understood that politicians say that to avoid losing votes rather than because it's their sincerely held belief?