Here goes... I was born and raised in Massachusetts (live in NC now) and I have to comment that the heartland does not have a monopoly on values. The people I grew up with, I think, would agree with almost all of the subjects/traits that you listed. I can't speak for all of "them" but here are my thoughts.
I look at my wife and feel love, affection and desire. I can't imagine having the same feelings for a man. That makes homosexuality unnatural to me but I don't believe gays choose to do what they do because they enjoy the abuse. God made them that way (I believe), but was it to give them an extra challenge in life or to give us the extra challenge... Acceptance may be due to overexposure. I'm used to seeing gays in the city and they've become another part of the landscape and I got over the uneasiness. I saw too many of my friends torn up by the divorce of their parents to worry about anyone's marriage more than my own. Do I want them marching down main steet in their underwear? No. But they are just as much a citizen and just as free as you or I.
As to guns... In the formation of our country they were a necessity. They became less so in the Northeast as the country expanded Westward. So, I don't think there's the same family traditions of gun ownership in the East as there is in the heartland. Gun control means less to people who never owned one.
At the base of the whole moral values issue for me is fear. I shy away from anyone who tries to tell me what mine should be, even when I happen to agree with the values themselves.
How same-sex "marriage" will affect you
Many people don't realize why it's so important to stop this movement now. We've all heard the favorite refrain of gay activists is "it won't affect you." In a broad sense, this has relatively little to do with affecting individual marriages. That's because to the homosexual movement, it's about a much larger issue.
Not really about marriage or benefits. . .
Interestingly, in the few places where homosexuals have won the fight to legalize gay "marriage', very few of them actually get married. Similarly with domestic partnership and insurance benefits.
For example, General Motors is listed as one of the top ten "gay-friendly" companies on the gay Human Rights Campaign website, after a hard-fought fight to get GM to offer same-sex "spousal" health insurance and other benefits. So how many GM employees choose to extend their health insurance to a same-sex partner? According to GM, only 166 employees, or one-one hundredth of one percent of all GM workers.
The real victory . . .
The real fight is about the forced, legal acceptance and sanctioning of homosexuality in both public and private life. The passionate fight for "gay marriage" is really about the movement's obsession over society accepting their behavior -- and their rage that without the force of law we never will.
By making homosexual behavior a legal entity -- as "marriage" or "civil unions" it carries with it the huge force of state-approved legal recognition.
When homosexual "marriage" becomes law, the citizens of Massachusetts should expect a lot of unforeseen consequences -- things for which the gay activist movement has worked long and hard:
Legal harrassment of groups that do not accept homosexuality. Even now, the Boy Scouts of America are being forced out of schools and denied use of public property for their programs, because of their principled stand against including openly homosexual scoutmasters and scouts. Most recently, on April 14, 2004, a judge in San Diego ruled that the Boy Scouts may not use a city-owned park because they are a "discriminatory organization."
Legally protected homosexual programs in public schools. The homosexual programs in the public schools are now generally done clandestinely and without parents' knowledge. The schools now back away when parents become aware and protest. But starting May 17, homosexual sexual activity, relationships, and "culture", will be legally sanctioned and considered normal. Keeping these programs out of schools will be discrimination. Teachers will be able to describe their homosexual relationships (along with pictures of their partners) without fear of parental retribution. After all, if same-sex relationships are written into law, they must be accepted. Assemblies and other activities for children equating homosexuality and heterosexuality will be perfectly legal.
Enforcement of gay-inclusive language in the schools. In public schools and all other public enterprises "husband and wife" and "father and mother" will be replaced by "partner and partner" or "spouse and spouse" or "parent and parent." This has already started happening in public schools in Newton and Cambridge. It will soon be mandatory. Acknowledging Mother's Day or Father's Day is already considered "verboten" in some public schools.
The proposed constitutional amendment -- a view into the future. Even the constitutional amendment currently drafted (but which still needs to pass two more votes) is draconian. It mandates that marriages and civil unions must be legally equivalent and covers all applicable state laws. It makes it very clear that no legal differences may exist between regular and homosexual marriages/unions.
Updating the anti-discrimination laws. The Civil Unions bill written by the Massachusetts Senate in January, is a clear statement of what lies in store. It updates the state's discrimination laws to make it illegal in Massachusetts for anyone to discriminate between a marriage and a homosexual civil union. This includes businesses, churches, individuals, etc.
All phases of business & public life. Thus, starting not too long after May 17, all businesses, churches, employment benefits packages, stores, etc. will have to treat same-sex "marriages" exactly like normal marriages in every manner. A business that doesn't offer the same benefits or considerations for them, or even a bridal shop that won't cater to two women, will soon be breaking the law.
Churches and homosexual adoption. Even today, Catholic Charities in Massachusetts is forced by the state to give orphaned children over to homosexual couples for adoption, or else lose all public funding. (Unfortunately, they comply rather than resist.) This approach will only get more militant.
Heavy fines. In California, business can now be fined up to $150,000 for not allowing a man to come to work dressed as a woman. Last year, the City of Boston, under pressure from gay activists, quietly passed a similar ordinance regarding housing.
Attack on churches. There is already a fledgling movement to force churches to lose their tax-exempt status if they don't perform same-sex marriages, or otherwise discriminate (possibly even in literature they distribute).
Hate-crime laws are the gay activists' favorite club to force the public into submission. It started in Boston several years ago when a bar was fined $100,000 for tossing out two men who were publicly kissing and causing a disturbance among the patrons. (This was set up, of course, to use the newly-created law.) That's just the beginning.
Already happening in Canada. We only have to look northward across the border. Last year the courts in Canada declared that homosexual marriage must be legalized. Immediately the hate-crime laws came into full force. New laws in Canada expose "dissenters" to fines, criminal records, and possible jail terms. A few of the incidents, as reported in the press:
The Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission ruled that a newspaper ad listing biblical passages that oppose homosexuality was a human-rights offense. The commission ordered the paper and Hugh Owens, the man who placed the ad, to pay $1,500 each to three gay men who objected to it.
Scott Brockie, a Christian with a print shop in Toronto, was forced to do printing for a gay and lesbian advocacy group, even though he claimed that doing so would force him to compromise his religious convictions. A board of inquiry for the Ontario Human Rights Commission declared that while Mr. Brockie was "free to hold his religious beliefs and to practise them in his home, and in his Christian community," in public, the rights of gays trumped his religious freedom.
a British Columbia court upheld the one-month suspension, without pay, of a high school teacher who wrote letters to a local paper arguing that homosexuality is not a fixed orientation but a condition that can and should be treated. The teacher, Chris Kempling, was not accused of discrimination, merely of expressing thoughts that the state defines as improper.
In Europe, they're already going after the churches. As columnist John Leo observed in a recent article:
In Sweden, sermons are explicitly covered by an anti-hate-speech law passed to protect homosexuals. The Swedish chancellor of justice said any reference to the Bible's stating that homosexuality is sinful might be a criminal offense, and a Pentecostal minister is already facing charges.
In Britain, police investigated Anglican Bishop Peter Forster of Chester after he told a local paper: "Some people who are primarily homosexual can reorientate themselves. I would encourage them to consider that as an option." Police sent a copy of his remarks to prosecutors, but the case was dropped.
In Ireland last August, the Irish Council for Civil Liberties warned that clergy who circulated a Vatican statement opposing gay marriages could face prosecution under incitement-to-hatred legislation.
This is just the beginning of what can and will happen in Massachusetts beginning May 17, when the force of law becomes a reality. And it's why citizens must get involved now - and not depend on their public officials to protect them.
This has been happening in MA since May 17th. Can you really believe it's not a problem??
Tolerance yes, by all means! Should anyone be discriminated against, their civil rights denied them, abused or worse yet attacked? absolutely NOT!! But the whole agenda as well as gay marriage is not a civil rights issue at all. and Gay marriage is just the starting point.