Friday, December 17, 2010
When is "anti-SSM" properly labeled "anti-gay?"
Here's an update on the controversy over Apple pulling a Manhattan Declaration app from its App Store. I'm more interested in MSNBC's headline for the story.
https://mirrorofjustice.blogs.com/mirrorofjustice/2010/12/when-is-anti-ssm-properly-labeled-anti-gay.html
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the
comment feed
for this post.
Your question implies that the Manhattan Declaration only takes a stand against same-sex marriage. However, it takes a stand against homosexual behavior: "We acknowledge that there are those who are disposed towards homosexual and polyamorous conduct and relationships, just as there are those who are disposed towards other forms of immoral conduct. . . . . [W]e pay tribute to the men and women who strive, often with little assistance, to resist the temptation to yield to desires that they, no less than we, regard as wayward . . . . "
I am not quite sure why polyamory is in there, but in any case, the position of the Manhattan Declaration is not that marriage is between a man and a woman and should not be redefined, and that same-sex relationships should be formalized in some other way, such as domestic partnerships or civil unions. It says that same-sex relationships are immoral and ought not to exist at all.
As I have argued in the past, "gay" means more than "homosexual." Calling oneself "gay" implies self-acceptance. A person with a homosexual orientation who rejects that orientation as "disorderd" and who is determined to resist "temptation to yield to desires that they . . . regard as wayward" does not call himself or herself "gay."
I think a good case could be made that opposing same-sex marriage is anti-gay, but one doesn't need to do that to call the Manhattan Declaration anti-gay. It brands anyone in a same-sex relationship as immoral. It also goes overboard trying to sound compassionate in a way that I find unconvincing and somewhat offensive.