As a serious question. Do you think civil protections for LGBT people, gay marriage, and the like needs debate and/or negotiation?
Because what makes some of us on the left come off smug or haughty is the fact that conservatives refuse to accept that we deserve those protections. Worse still, some of them think that LGBT people should be put into some kind of hospital to be "cured" because "JESUS!" I'm not trying to lash out but it's a real complaint I have as someone who was formerly an evangelical Christian. It's a thread of thought I see that conservatives get looped into that their faith should override their sense of good law. I'm not asking for the Christian churches out there to let me join their congregations. I'm asking for them to respect my civil rights as I respect theirs. It's a reciprocal arrangement with both benefit. It's mutualism at it's best. Why is this so hard for them? I just want a good answer beyond their emotive, knee jerk reactions.
If you were a former evangelical Christian, then you should understand that according to most modern evangelical strains of Christianity (Southwestern Baptist anyways), treating LGBT people like human beings basically means rejecting the Christian faith. Sodom & Gorromah (& all that Old Testament jazz) & Romans 1:24 - 27 & 1 Corinthians 6:9 - 20 (& etc) were all impressed upon me from a very young age.
Oh, and religion & faith is largely based on emotion, so asking for something other than an emotive response from an Evangelical Christian is... misguided. (As far as I'm concerned, the Evangelical & Pentecostal strains of Christianity have evolved to be largely based on inspiring emotion particularly in their services, from the pop style worship music to the street preacher style sermons).
There's plenty of errors in their theology on this but I'll say that the fact Jesus in his own teachings and that of his followers thereafter saw a distinction between matters of the spiritual and the temporal means they're in error. The laws of the land protecting individuals are not tests of faith except where such laws force to you to believe or espouse otherwise. Marriage in this regard is civil marriage and not spiritual marriage (marriage affirmed by God or that of church elders). The fact they conflate the civil (temporal) with the spiritual amuses me to no end because it shows the mental gymnastics they'll go through to assert the Kingdom is a literal domain on Earth despite the canon and non-canon sources for what Jesus said on this (i.e. the Kingdom isn't the temporal/material). So, I think there will come a reckoning in the church if/when followers start to read their own Bibles and not listen to their pastors (the spirit of discernment is not exclusive to church elders). I just wish to live to see that day as much amusement will be had when it all falls apart.
Theologically, I agree, but I'm not sure what would cause the followers to actually question current teachings. Usually, followers of a movement don't question the path taken until they lose confidence for some reason (like Democrats recently discovered). When it comes to religion, such losses of confidence seem to usually be on the personal level, so a large scale reckoning seems unlikely.
I find it ironic that some of the strongest shouters of "Freedom!" are anti-LGBT. The US has some powerfully conservative morals. In my own travels as a foreigner across the US (a straight white anglo male), I found that there were plenty of times I had to watch what I said or did. The big cities where people don't chant "Freedom" is where people acted freer, and the rural areas were opposite (broadly speaking).
I'm a centre-left in my own country, which would be far left in the US. Gay marriage is a non-issue to me, because it doesn't affect anyone that is not involved and consenting. I'm of the opinion that if those religious people who oppose it because it brings the devil or some such, if they want to ban it because of their beliefs, then they should step forward and provide some proof. If you want to meddle in a stranger's life, there should at least be some evidence, rather than a hunch.
Unfortunately I don't have a good answer for you, apart from the intolerant christians simply turning to religion because of easy answers. There's plenty of christians in the US who don't bludgeon their neighbours with their faith, and those people generally are up for discussion. It's like the Church of England in the UK - they're christian, but they're also perfectly normal people that can live beside people who don't behave the same as them. But if you're the kind of person who finds asking searching questions difficult, then a loud defense of your religion helps keep you 'safe'.
As for the smugness, I find it hilarious when conservatives talk about how smug progressives are, even as they're using a dismissive tone as they describe that smugness. The main article is a classic example of this, and my comment was just meant to point out that both sides do this tactic that the author so despises.
Unfortunately, the only way to get people to change these kind of deeply-held beliefs is to get them to ask themselves questions about it, and they may get there of their own accord. But if the other side isn't listening, then those questions can't be seeded.
A shorter form of my opinions on gay marriage is this: it's fucking outrageous that a completely unrelated person can get in the way of a loved one making important decisions for their partner (like medical care). Is there a need for debate on it? No, not if you're for 'Freedom'. And, of course, if a person is not for 'Freedom', then they must Hate America :)
Because what makes some of us on the left come off smug or haughty is the fact that conservatives refuse to accept that we deserve those protections. Worse still, some of them think that LGBT people should be put into some kind of hospital to be "cured" because "JESUS!" I'm not trying to lash out but it's a real complaint I have as someone who was formerly an evangelical Christian. It's a thread of thought I see that conservatives get looped into that their faith should override their sense of good law. I'm not asking for the Christian churches out there to let me join their congregations. I'm asking for them to respect my civil rights as I respect theirs. It's a reciprocal arrangement with both benefit. It's mutualism at it's best. Why is this so hard for them? I just want a good answer beyond their emotive, knee jerk reactions.