11/10 Update: Thanks to your activism and the activism of GLAAD and Ellen DeGeneres the show was held accountable for the outright lies spread by Sherri Shepherd on prop 8. Also, one thing that keeps irritating me is that this show is supposed to be informative. They talked about the gay adoption ban, in the last program they said they thought it was in Nebraska, well on today's program they said that as if it were factual. The adoption ban was in Arkansas, if you want people to take the show seriously, get the facts straight. I wish Sherri Shepherd and Elisabeth Hasselbeck would keep their religious viewpoint out of the political debate on civil rights.
H/T to Good As You for the video.
11/8 Sherri Shepherd one of the co-hosts of "The View" of ABC spread a lot of misinformation about marriage equality and prop 8. She talks of her "pastor possibly being jailed" for speaking against homosexuality. She also said that gay issues are something she "struggles" with because she has gay friends. She "doesn't want rights being taken away" but she says she is a "christian and believes marriage is between a man and a woman."
Contact Sherri Sheperd over her anti-gay views.
Posts
49 comments:
I'm really struggling over whether Sherri Shepard is a human being. To think someone like her would have the audacity to even contemplate whether or not another group should have equal rights! But of course the oppressed always become the oppressors, particularly when they get religion.
Done.
Thank you, I have noticed this myself, Buffy. What is this thing with oppressed minorities and religion? Religion is supposed to make someone feel better and more kindly towards their fellow human beings.
I'm clergy myself and I sent the following:
Dear Sherri,
am very disappointed that you are spreading such blatant misinformation regarding marriage equality. Marriage equality simply that same-sex couples will be able to marry like everyone else.
Your church will NOT be forced to marry same-sex couples, they will not. Your pastor will NOT be jailed for speaking out against homosexuality, although it is sad that in this day and age, it is sad to see bigotry and misinformation being given to religious Americans in an effort to deny
civil rights to other Americans.
Marriage equality only allows same-sex couples to marry--it does not require the church to marry these couples. Those churches who do not wish to allow same sex-marriage will be allowed to continue their current policies, whilst same sex couples who desire to wed will be able to do so.
You have the freedom in America to believe according to the dictates of your conscience. Same-sex couples whould not be denied marriage, however, as Christianity is not and never has been the state religion.
I ask you to pray and think about how you would feel if you were not permitted to marry the man you loved and wished to commit your life to.
I married my spouse in Canada last year. We are both monogamous, completely committed to being together as a married couple until death do us part. We married there because our right to legally be together is unlikely to be taken away.
I would suggest to you and other Christians to attack the real danger to so-called "traditional marriage" and that is divorce. Divorce, not same-sex marriage is the real threat. Currently, the divorce rate in the United States stands at over 50 percent. This is the real scandal, not the desire of same eex couples, such as Del Martin and Phyllis Lyons, who married legally this past June in California after having been together over 50 years.
God is love, not a being who wishes to spread hate and untruths, no matter what some who "serve" might believe. I urge you again to pray and search your heart in this matter.
Blessings,
Bishop Ioan
Any LGBT clergy or just LGBT, I urge you not to let her comments go unchallenged.
I was very hurt Tuesday night when voters in California, Florida, and Arizona decided that it is perfectly fine to take away our civil rights...and now to see this sort of thing being commented upon on network television, well that is just disgusting.
Sorry about the typos, guys. I was pretty upset when I sent it.
The misinformation factor is key, here. A show like The View has such a huge audience, and the likelihood that viewers took away from that show the idea that gay marriage leads the persecution of clergy makes me FUME.
I just hope that most viewers are aware that Sheri spews so much nonsense on the show that anything she says is not to be trusted.
I struggle w/how to deal w/these "The Bible says" types. How do you fight irrational logic friven ideas? We must fight, hit their bank accts., COME OUT, support each other more (like this blog does), go on strike, letters to ed., step up/speak out; now is our moment. Great ltr, Bishop, thx.
How can you love someone (friend and/or family member) and be okay with their rights being taken away? This has nothing to do with whether or not you believe marriage should be between a man and a woman. I am not out to change anyone's mind, no matter how frustrated I am with some of the religious people out there. This is about HUMAN RIGHTS being taken away. *sigh*
I sent this video to sherri and maybe you can share it with any other minority who votes against another groups' rights:
http://seesmic.com/#/video/X3ofypzuBB/watch
This was a sincere response to someone on seesmic (a social network/video conversation) who said she didn't really "get it why gays have to flaunt and have pride."
Please feel free to share.
Troy aka CocteauBoy
Sherri Sheperd is dumber than my German Shepherd.
To the "anonymous" poster who directed his/her comment at me. No. I am not trans. However, I am not gay or bisexual either. Please take note that not everyone on here is LGBT. I am an ally of the LGBT community and am always trying to broaden my understanding of LGBT issues.
Kelly thanks for being an ally. Ignore that anonymous poster, they just parade around leaving comments about how everyone hates trans people, even though here many of us are dedicated to trans rights. They seem to be ignorant and filled with lots of hate.
It just goes to show that the Uninformed & Uneducated should just keep their mouths shut, Especially when in front of the camera. That way they could atleast keep up the Illusion of inteligence...
Here is what I wrote to Sherri
Dear Sherri,
To be honest I have not been watching you on the VIEW for that long. Ever since Rosie left the show I have not been as interested in watching it. I will also add that I have always loved your personality and point of view on matters. Your opinion has always been fresh. I can even remember when you were going through some rough times in your marriage and I was so pleased to hear things worked out for you and your family. You deserve to have a great positive loving family. Everyone deserves the right for a loving positive family. My hat goes off to you for making that work!
I am sad that I did watch your recent broadcast where you talked about the recent Gay Marriage Prop 8 issue in California. I am a congregant, community organizer, son, nephew, teacher, professional actor and comedian. I am also a human being who can love, cry, laugh, fear and hurt.
I am also gay, living in a loving relationship with my partner Scott for the past 10 years. I do not pretend to suggest that you should even remotely agree with my life including my homosexuality. I understand you are a Christian and I would never take your rights away to be that person of faith. It is your God given right. I would even fight anyone who tried to take away your faith.
What bothers me tonight is your understanding of history.
I just finished watching Mississippi Burning, an outstanding film chronicling the horrific murders of two young White civil rights activists and a young Black man. If you have not seen this movie, please watch it. I didn't plant to see it today but I did. I could not help hear what the White Christians were preaching in Mississippi in 1964 are so similar to the same issues surrounding gays and lesbians today. The rhetoric came fully equipped with Bible chapter and verse to make their case why Blacks should never mix or even mingle with the White folks. No one could understand (not even the Blacks) why they should live the way they were living (oppressed) but they accepted it all under the guise of God's law.
All I ask is for you to have an open heart, find it in your heart to watch this movie again. I am speaking about Civil Rights not Godly laws. Think about the State sanctioned oppression Black families endured during the civil rights movement. I also understand their bloodshed was far more horrific than any blood spilled regarding Prop 8, Amen for that! I make no comparison that LGBTQ folks are being killed like those in the movie; but with all due respect, WE are being burned out of the fabric of our society when great intelligent personalities like you make broad sweeping comments like you did on your show. Please know that many young gay brothers and sisters will be hurt by the words you speak. Just like in the movie, one character says that we are not born with hate, it is taught in our homes and in our Churches. I know you are not a person of hate, I just know it in my soul that you would denounce hate at all costs.
I wish you continued success on the View and peace to your family and friends (especially to those two gay uncle friends!) I really know we can agree to disagree on this but I only wish you can watch the movie and imagine how MY fight is no different than their fight was to become truly free.
With peace,
Ed Reggi
Please also go to ABC's Contact Us page and complain
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html?lid=ABCCOMGlobalFooter&lpos=CONTACT
You can select what show and select if it is a complaint.
Pastors in AMERICA would never be jailed for speaking out against homosexuality because we have a very strong 1st Amendment-- Freedom of Speech and Freedom of Religion.
If this happened in another country it is irrelevant.
Our Freedom of Speech is even stronger than that of Canadas and many of the European countries.
Sherri and Elizabeth gave voice to the scare tactics and lies that the Yes on 8 people used.
Let them know that everyone deserves equal rights and that popular votes should not be used to nullify marriages or take away people's children (like in Arkansas).
I'm just so very thankful for Whoopi's presence and sense on the show!
I find it interesting that farm animals were given more rights than gays on Nov 4.
I'm going to get beat up for this but I don't see what the deal is with Civil Unions vs Marriage. I think everyone should have equal rights and I'm all for it. But I agree with Whoopi 100% at the end of this video when she says that if civil unions included EVERY right that marriage does, except the "word" marriage, then people would be happy. I know that would be good enough for me, but some people in the gay community don't think that is good enough. They insist on fighting for the right to use that M word. It's just a word! I've been called a traiter to my community for the way I feel about this. What do you all think?
What Whoopie and Barbara say make sense
to me :) It's ignorance and brain washing
that hurt people....It's all done through
the church....
HUGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I agree with PowerDiva in the fact that I don't really care what my union would be called. All I care about are the rights that come with the union. Tax breaks and hospital visits mostly concern me. I don't go to church, so having a church 'marriage' isn't a concern. Just give me all the same rights under the law and I'll be fine. If it takes us getting same sex marriage to get those same rights so be it. Other than that, keep the churches for yourself. I don't have anything against God or churches in general. I used to attend regularly. I have a relationship with God and I don't need a church to validate it.
Civil Unions do NOT have all the rights and protections as marriage. That is a myth.
Marriage has the most rights and protections and then next in line is Domestic Partnerships and last is Civil Unions...
http://lesbianlife.about.com/cs/wedding/a/unionvmarriage.htm
"Immigration:
A United States citizen who is married can sponsor his or her non-American spouse for immigration into this country. Those with Civil Unions have no such privilege.
Taxes:
Civil Unions are not recognized by the federal government, so couples would not be able to file joint-tax returns or be eligible for tax breaks or protections the government affords to married couples.
Benefits:
The General Accounting Office in 1997 released a list of 1,049 benefits and protections available to heterosexual married couples. These benefits range from federal benefits, such as survivor benefits through Social Security, sick leave to care for ailing partner, tax breaks, veterans benefits and insurance breaks. They also include things like family discounts, obtaining family insurance through your employer, visiting your spouse in the hospital and making medical decisions if your partner is unable to. Civil Unions protect some of these rights, but not all of them. "
I hope people still contact Sherri and tell her that her views were repugnant.
Also continue to contact ABC and complain...
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html?lid=ABCCOMGlobalFooter&lpos=CONTACT
I might be stating the obvious, but I feel like a lot of our (LGBTQ) struggle we are discussing here has to do with identity politics and American Nationalism. Perhaps we as a Queer community need to examine what that means to us as a community and the struggle for social justice. I also want to acknowledge a post on this thread related to the struggle within our own community between LGB and the Trans community. Queers United told "Kelly" an ally to ignore an anonymous post due to the anger of the person posting. I am not trans., but I feel the anger is valid among people in the trans community and that perhaps we should take a closer look at how inter group conflict disempowers both the LGB and Trans movements. It's important we know ourselves so we can better educate our allys. Finally this site is very inclusive and I really appreciate that it exist!!!!
ALL of the women got reality wrong in some way except Whoopi. And even she didn't know that it was Arkansas which just joined Florida in its enormous anti-gay bigotry. They ran through this BEFORE the election also, helping the anti-gay fucktards. While those so inclined move on in court, etc., with these cases, we must move on to revenge and make this enormous wrong cost them plenty. Yes, there IS a place for punishment of one's enemies in every movement. You canNOT say, "I have friends who are gay," and then vote against their equality. One never stabs FRIENDS in the back in such dramatic, long-lasting ways. Never. The Knights of Columbus, all Mormons, most Catholics, 2/3 of blacks and about half of Hispanics are the volunteer enemies of gay people and must be treated as such until we get what's ours. I'm not Jesus, I do not forgive. Don't be afraid of your anger, just use it wisely. Sabotage is a wonderful tool of the disenfranchised and the Resistance. Picket and harrass heterosexual weddings involving any divorced person. Boycott Sherri and punish her for lying in any way you can. Tank her "career". Same for the lying talent-free blonde.
And quit turning on each other. If you have a legitimate gripe about how you are being treated as a transgendered person then deal with that separately. We have every right to demand total equality in word and deed and we don't even have to dress up or clean up to achieve it. We are not and never will be perfect within ourselves and neither were blacks, but we own equality as we are, warts and all. Don't you dare turn your anger at the hets against other Queers....
powerdiva - if its the same thing, why can't we call it by the same name? it creates a separate but equal situation. I want to be married, not civil unionized. civil unions also lack of hundreds of rights that come with marriage.
Also complain to ABC about Sherri and Elizabeth spreading these homophobic lies...
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html
powerdiva -- it is assumed that marriage rights travel across states. Civil unions don't. Meaning I could lose all rights to care for my partner in a state that doesn't acknowledge civil unions (think making health decisions or admittance to a dying loved one's ICU bed.)
And Arkansas just voted to retract adoption and foster care placement from all couples except those legally MARRIED. Civil union couples couldn't adopt there.
I could go on, but I hope you get the point.
Sherri please educate yourself before speaking next time. Although I didn't need anyone to convince me that other people's civil rights were important.
Sherri Shepherd has the brains of a clam. I am struggling with how she manages to hold a high-visibility job, unless it is to train her female audience to be really, really stupid.
I dont need the word marriage. Let the churches have it if they want it so bad. All marriages should be civil unions, since it is about the rights and responsibilities granted by the state. I want equality in the way gays are treated by our government. Nothing more, nothing less. Unless they will let me pay less taxes since I have less rights.
Maybe there should be a protest/march/vigil outside of The View's studio...
It kills me that Hasselbeck says things like "legislating from the bench" and "the people voted and it's the will of the people". Ok. Like I've said a million times. What if "the people" decided all of a sudden that black people couldn't get married or short people or christians. Or if folks decided tall people couldn't adopt children. Is that ok then? It's such a stupid argument that ignorants like Lizzy continue to put forth. 90% of the country was against interractial marriage at the time it was made legal. Were they "activist" judges legislating from the bench? No, they were judges doing their job and doing the "right" thing.
You are right. Equal rights for women and African Americans were granted by so-called activist judges and legislatures.
The 14th Amendment also protects minorities against the tyranny of the majority.
E-mail ABC's The View and have them correct Elizabeth's misinformation...
http://abc.go.com/site/contactus.html
Anonymous who speaks of gays hating trans all the time on every post. First off make a name since you keep coming back, and its annoying to see anonymous, you should also own up to your words if you stand behind them. Second, you don't know me, you don't know if I am trans or gay, or black or white, don't assume stuff. For all you know I am an straight old lady who has a lesbian granddaughter.
What are you trying to accomplish? This is a blog of inclusion so I don't know why you are wasting your time ranting. You should use your energy at those who are actually hating on the trans community rather than on this blog which is made up of gays, straights, trans, asexual, intersex, etc
Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge you to take 2 seconds to make a username, so we actually know who we are talking to. It gets crazy to respond to those who post as anonymous.
There is hate and ignorance on all sides of the issue/debate. However, it doesn't mean that EVERYONE is filled with hate and ignorance.
I agree that the 'anonymous' people should create a name. It makes you seem less credible when you aren't willing to attach your beliefs to your name.
@Queers United
I want to be married, not civil unionized. civil unions also lack of hundreds of rights that come with marriage.
The fact that we want to all it a civil union and not a marriage means it will not be equal. Anyone remember Jim Crow, that was separate but equal to. As long as we all don't have the same rights inequality exists.
Renee - What I don't get is if they say civil unions and marriage are the same (even though civil unions lack 1,000 rights that marriage provides) why do they care if we can use the word as well? This whole M word thing is such nonsense.
"Please folks who are typing as anonymous, I urge you to take 2 seconds to make a username, so we actually know who we are talking to. It gets crazy to respond to those who post as anonymous."
Please "Queers United," consider fixing your damn blog so it doesn't crash when I try and register, or toss every other post I make. I do remember mentioning my inability to register elsewhere.
That said, you also identified yourself as a gay male in another post. I am pretty sure you are also white, from the rather white and USA centric slant of your posts. Your knowledge of trans issues is not something I would expect from anybody else but a gay male who fancies himself liberal and hip for "having best friends who are trans, black, etc.
In addition, if unity means keeping gay transphobia in the closet, who exactly does it serve? What about race baiting? What about the near total lack of trans centric articles (Not counting demeaning frivolous pap like hormonally ill chickens mislabeled as 'trans.")
It serves you and other gay white males, that's who...and at everybody else's expense.
And that is why I am here...to keep you honest as you whine about gays facing discrimination, flaunt your race baiter view of nonwhites, and generally present a dime story novel understanding of trans issues.
You also even manage to demonize African diaspora peeps. Nice.
And...I consider you just an immoral oppressor for doing what you do. Your white gay male centric approach is getting seriously old now, and is seriously appropriative as well. There is no need to stain a pursuit of gay rights with cultural appropriation, denial, dishonesty, and race baiting and plain old marginalization and exploitation of trans lives.
The fact that you belittle a trans woman like me on your site does not aid your case... it just makes you look smug and arrogant.
Try bringing some integrity and honesty to your "united" approach, and watch how fast I align with you. At the least, you will be believeable, instead of simply another liar hiding behind a pseudonym on the Net who likes beating the messenger.
My bad... you said "queer male" Apologies for failing to acknowledge you as a queer male. Shame on you for forgetting that you outed yourself.
Queersunited this is not a civil rights issue. This is a definition issue please stop confusing the two. The word marriage implies union between a man and a woman. I'm so grateful for this country that we live in where everyone can have different opinions but because someone has a differing opinion does not make them a moron or a bigot. This is an issue of me raising my kids how I best see fit. Where would my rights be if prop 8 had not passed? I legally would not be able to deny taking a homosexual couples wedding pictures, my church could be sued if they refused to marry a homosexual couple and most importantly religious adoption agencies would have to be shut down. Please live your life as you desire without intruding on my life and how I choose to raise my family. You deserve every right and privilege a heterosexual couple has within marriage but please do not attempt to redefine marriage, that is taking away my civil rights.
Since when does marriage mean between a man and a woman? Dictionaries didn't even say that till activist conservatives changed it. Marriage has evolved from a man and his many wives who were considered property and purchased from their fathers.
"Please live your life as you desire without intruding on my life and how I choose to raise my family."
You said it perfectly, please let my family live, you don't have to like us, just stop denying our rights and civil rights, not religious marriage, civil.
I understand this is a passionate issue for you as it is for me, but you fail to see how this movement if allowed does not let me live my life as I best see fit for my family. You do have your civil rights, tell me if your partner is in the hospital can you not see them, can you not own property with your partner? You have the same rights as I do, you do not have the authority to redefine a word or term. And for the record I have ZERO issues with homosexual individuals it is just like anything else, there are radicals and stupid people apart of any group. If this is how you want to live your life, fabulous. But stopping trying to ram it down my throat and portraying me and my family like bigots because we believe strongly in traditional values. You cannot have it both ways, you live your life, I live my life and the other does not strongly affect the other.
Traditional marriage is a man and many wives, are you in favor of polygamy? How does my marriage effect your life? Churches are exempt from performing marriages, the clause was in the court decision. How are we by just living and being who we are ramming it down your throat, anymore than you are ramming your heterosexual agenda down ours?
You decided to change what has been traditionally accepted as marriage. Prop 8 did not start out of thin air it was a response to the gay community changing an establishment. I do not believe for a moment the heterosexual community would have backed prop 8 or prop 22 if there was not a push to change what has been accepted for hundreds of years. That is where I am coming from when I say ramming it down our throats. And to answer your question, your marriage affects whether I can adopt children through my church and what curriculum is taught to my children. That greatly affects my life.
Marriage is a living institution; that means it is evolving. It is not static. Time was when slaves could not be joined in 'marriage,' time was when anyone who had been married could not be divorced legally. People who can marry in one state cannot marry in another; in some places cousins can marry while in others they cannot.
Marriage as an institution is NOT as cut and dried as anti-gay marriage people and the Christian rightwing insist. And I hate to mention that there ARE instances of gays being married in the church, just as gays marry every day in churches all across the United States. How dare the government not accept the church's definition of Marriage when it is, as Sherri says, a deeply spiritual thing?
The churches don't agree; the Bible is actually NOT clear on this since the words that humans decided meant 'homosexuality' don't necessarily mean that at all. The laws don't agree, either, since in some states the current law is seen as discriminatory, while in others discrimination against gays and others is alive and well.
Best course of action for the govt is to let each church define marriage for itself and define civil marriage/civil wedding/civil union to apply equally to all Americans. That is the only FAIR way.
Will rabid rightwing Christians accept such a compromise? Of course not.
Christians do have legitimate concerns when it comes to them being forced to accept homosexuality through marriage or otherwise or in the schools. Why is a teacher taking her class on a field trip to a gay wedding? I've never gone on a field trip to a straight wedding. There's definitely seems to be an underlying agenda there (at least on the teacher's part).
There was even a case where a New Mexican photographer ended up in court over refusing a lesbian couple's request to work at their wedding. She didn't break a contract, she just simply refused to enter into one. It's costing her a lot of money right now.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/feb/25/artist-hit-for-refusal-on-beliefs/
So while it's all well and good to say clergy won't be forced to perform ceremonies, what happens to the other 90% of Evangelical Christians who AREN'T legally protected by the title of Reverend?
Just something to think about. By the way, I'm BLACK, FEMALE, STRAIGHT, CHRISTIAN, and open-minded enough to try to understand and research where BOTH sides of the issue of coming from.
The lesbian wedding field trip was at the suggestion of the school not the teacher herself. It was a school trip in which the parents agreed and signed waivers for their kids to go, the parents wanted their children to attend.
As far as the New Mexican wedding, what if the photographer did not want to tape a black wedding, would they be in their right to not do that?
Thank you for clarifying the school field trip issue for me. And you're right, the parents most likely had to sign permission slips as with all field trips. But I guess I'm wondering what was the purpose of the field trip? It would easier to support this if there had been a history of attending different wedding services from many different cultures. Then this would be just another one of the many different types of nuptials. But I'm assuming that this was the first field trip for these children to ANY kind of wedding.
Yes, I believe the vendor always reserves the right to refuse service especially when they own the business. This means that if you own your own pharmacy and don't want to give out the birth control pill for religious reasons, that's your prerogative. Or a doctor should not be forced to perform abortions if it is against their conscience. (I am pro-choice btw). Customers would just have to look elsewhere. However, if you work for Walgreens, Walmart, or CVS, you had better hand me my pills.
I know of pastors who would marry christians and marry non-christians, but won't marry non-christians with christians based on the Biblical principal of Christians not being yoked with non-believers. Proving that they are not against non-christians, but believe that the Bible them not to. So if you're looking for an interfaith marriage, you'll just have to go to the many other ministers that perform them.
Granted this may never happen, but if I were a photographer and a klansman needed me to photograph a peaceful rally he had every legitimate right to be involved in, I would like to believe that I had the right, based on my personal beliefs and disapproval to refuse whether I were Black or White.
But I repeat, how come it's ok to say that the clergy will be protected against retribution for speaking and practicing their faith and conscience, but the same courtesy will not be extended to their parishioners that have the same strong beliefs?
Another thing I would like to point out is that this may be different from just straight out racial discrimination. I can't speak for this particular photographer, but perhaps this isn't a case of hating gay people, but rather not agreeing with gay marriage. Like what if they had hired her to work at a non-gay event? If she had refused simply because they were gay, then I would have to look at the situation with more scrutiny.
There's a phrase that's popular amongst Christians and non-Christians alike: Hate the sin, love the sinner. Whether you believe that homosexuality is a sin or not, do you believe that someone of this opinion (gay = sin) can truly separate their opinion of a person from the behavior and lifestyle of said person? Maybe if you could, you'd have a little more sympathy for Sherri Shepard. After all, she's not simply throwing the baby out with the bath water. She probably represents a growing segment of the population who are trying to reconcile what they "know" and believe about homosexuality and the real world implications of relationships friends, family, neighbors, and co-workers of the LGBT community. People moving from hating and apathetic to TRYING to understand despite feeling as if they maybe going against the wishes of their God. Instead of wanting to cuss out people like Sherri and making them feel like poo because they're not so quick to jump on the gay bandwagon (and I'm NOT speaking to you specifically QU), why not TRY to at least see where she's coming from and put yourselves in her shoes. Think about it, she's trying to see where the LGBT community is coming from because if she wasn't, she wouldn't have to "struggle" so much with prop 8. You don't understand that she now becomes a go-between for your community to others that are against your community. She may eventually become a stronger advocate than any gay person may ever be, simply because she has a greater capacity to understand both sides. It's like a converted atheist can be a more effective converting other atheist because they may not be as self-righteous as the lifetime Christians. Believe it or not, gays can be just as self-righteous as the people they talk against. It seems that both sides are operating on guilt and compulsion rather than love and understanding.
I'm sorry for going on and on. You don't necessarily have to respond, I just thought I'd try to share a point of view that is rarely shared on these blogs.
Peace and Love,
Crystal (the previous anonymous poster)
crystal thanks for making a username and providing your input. Atleast you are consistent in your belief. Ie: a photographer should be able to deny photographing a gay or black wedding, etc as they see fit. See my issue with that is, where does it end? What if one lives in a small town, and the business says we choose to cater only to asian people? Should all the other races have to goto different towns simply because this owner does not like or agree with someone else?
I can't watch The View anymore because they have dumbed it down to a level so low that I can't tolerate it any longer. Sherri and Elisabeth are not only closed minded religion addicts but they are also very uninformed of the facts. These women need to do their research when on a television show like this. I also feel the producers AND Barbara Walters are minipulating the viewers with staged "controversy". I won't waste any more of my life on this B grade "talk" show.
Post a Comment