Many of my friends and acquaintances are homosexual. They’re nice people, great people. They pay their taxes. Most are more involved in their communities than almost all conservative Christians I know. Many Profess a love for God, and bear a lot of good fruit that indicates they are sincere. They deserve the legal rights every other American has, including the right to be legally joined to the person they love, and all the privileges that entails. After saying as much I seriously doubt you’ll ever see me hop on the ‘ban the gays!’ bandwagon.
Honestly I am not riding in the other cart either. Parts of the ongoing reform bother me, like bakeries being sued for not providing wedding cakes for gay couples. If a company (not owned or subsidized by the government) wants to refuse service to people and lose sales, then so be it. If I were gay and was refused service because of it, I would let my entire network of friends and family know about the situation, as well as the local community in every way I could imagine. I would not try to force them to serve me. That is petty, and shows a tremendous lack of self respect.
Suing locations is a much more troublesome idea. I open news sites everyday expecting to see that some tiny church chapel somewhere is being sued for not allowing their facilities to be used by a gay couple for a wedding. If you sit and think of all the ramifications of that, you’ll realize it is a far bigger issue that previously mentioned baked goods. We would be crossing lines of Church and State, freedom of religion, etc. This should never happen. Many churches would nail their doors closed first and not just the Christians. Imagine the same scenario at a Mosque.
‘But you sounded pro-gay before. Now you sound like every other bigot!’ No. I actually want to do something unheard of over the past few decades. Compromise. The Church doesn’t want the government in their business and the state gets a lot of heat if religion interacts with them on any meaningful level. When marriage and unions are involved, why do they have to interact at all? They don’t. The solution to end this quagmire is simple. So simple it will never happen.
Legal civil unions. For everyone. Applying for and receiving one would be a similar process to getting a marriage license. At that point, legally, the government is done. Gay, straight, devout, atheist, the paper work is over and done, and all of your rights are in place as soon as the ink dries. States should be able to recognize this without violating their recently added traditional marriage constitutional amendments.
‘Marriage’ would return to solely being a religious institution. Homosexuals would not even be locked out of the religious part, as many Christian churches are thrilled to accept and marry gay couples. Homophobic churches will be able to maintain their piety, and can subsequently lose ‘business’ if they’re not willing to serve gay couples and those that support them.
This idea only works if the government is truly willing to be separate from the Church. Church folk would have to agree at the polls and would demand to be assured that ‘the gays’ won’t be able to force their way in to their cherished Sunday morning social club meetings. Everyone would have to work together to ensure equality. Sadly, for that reason alone, it will probably never peacefully happen. Which I think is sad because it’s the closest idea I’ve ever heard regarding the subject where everybody wins, and no one really loses.