This comes from a person who'd prefer to remain nameless. And if I thought like this, I'd prefer to remain nameless, too…
I read your friend's article about the gay teacher and that's very nice. I have no problem with gays as teachers as long as they don't try to indoctrinate but I do have a problem with the whole gay rights thing. Maybe it's different where you are working in show business but I have always had a problem approving of the idea of two men or two women as a couple. I hope you don't think I'm a bad person for this but I respect your writing and your blog even when I disagree with your politics and wonder if you could expand a little on what you wrote.
No, I don't think you're a bad person because of your viewpoint. You might be for other reasons. And when you write "I have a problem" or "I have no problem," you're off to a good start because you're realizing, perhaps subconsciously, that it is all a matter of your problems. Those of us who have no problem with Gay Rights have no problems at all in this area…except maybe with those who have their own problems about it.
The thing is: No one is really asking you to approve or disapprove of homosexuality. I mean, you can if you want just as I can believe that certain of my friends are in unhealthy (for them) relationships regardless of whether there's one of each gender in the couple. But I don't have a right to stop them from being together or want my government to discourage or condemn their union.
I know plenty of gay people. I can't give you a number because I know lots of people who might be gay but I don't know whether they are or they aren't, nor do I think much about it. And it works fine for me to file it in the "none of my business" folder and just ignore it unless they bring it up for some reason. I suspect a lot of folks who oppose Gay Marriage simply don't encounter many gay people or don't recognize it in the ones around them.
Some of the more vocal opponents certainly have some bizarre ideas about homosexuality; that it's a "choice," that it can be prayed-away, etc. The oddest are those who bring procreation into the matter…you know, like we have to stop Gay Marriage because the world will run out of people if everyone isn't out there reproducing. What they don't get is that even if there were a crisis of Not Enough Babies, no legislation is going to cause Adam and Steve to give birth. It's kind of off the menu with those boys.
As the saying goes, they're here, they're queer, get used to it. I long ago got used to the idea that some people like to sleep with folks who have the same physical equipment. It doesn't bother me one bit and despite some hysterical, illogical screeds about it "destroying traditional marriage," I don't see that allowing it harms anything. On the other hand, blocking it establishes all sorts of ugly precedents about government control of the sex lives of consenting adults. That's where the danger is in all this; that, plus the fact that some pretty sleazy politicians have been able to demagogue this issue and use it for donations and votes.
I was pleased today to see Vice-President Biden come out for Gay Marriage and to suggest it's now the stance of the Administration. They should have done this years ago and I'm hoping that the Obama crew has made a wise calculation, as they often do on this kind of issue, that it's no longer Bad Politics for Democrats.