This is a response I emailed to Rev. Clarence James, an adjunct instructor at Temple University in response to his statement here:
When comparing our struggle with that of the African Americans, we (I) are saying that we struggle for the same legal rights as those that our fellow humans share. Agreed we don’t know the “suffering” that African Americans know through a past of
slavery but does that justify not giving us equal rights? Should a group be submitted to slavery or other extreme suffering to deserve equality? That is simply faulty logic.
All we are asking for is LEGAL EQUALITY. We don’t want religious sanctioning, we want the same legal government benefits that are afforded to heterosexuals; whites, blacks,
Latinos, and women, along with all other groups. From a religious aspect I can understand your objection, but how does that play into the government which is suppose to be
separate? “People are free in our nation to pursue relationships as they choose. To redefine marriage, however, to suit the preference of those choosing alternative
lifestyles is wrong.” Interesting statement; I could imagine a similar statement 150 years ago pertaining to redefining the voters with regards to a whole person and 3/5 a person.
The constitution is an ever-changing document, to reflect the ever-changing social landscape. How can you support an amendment that would restrict civil liberties? Granted, also
that the public opinion polls don’t support gay marriage, however in the 1960’s they didn’t support desegregation either. I am simply appalled at the intolerance and inequality that you support.