I live abroad so I don’t even know who this lady is. The article however made a parallel between Black rights and Gay rights, which to me is wrong-minded. One is race and nothing can be done about ones race, the other is a practice, like cigarette smoking or over-eating.
Anyhow, as someone here mentioned, her’s is not a marriage, just as a funeral with the corpse only playing dead is not a funeral. She might have a wonderful personality and be a bundle of fun and an excellent showgirl, but she is part of something which is unspeakably wrong and ugly and far-reaching: the breakdown of morality and family values.
Being a good old boy or in this case, a good ole girl, makes her all the more dangerous to the single most important cause of our times: maintaining moral integrity, upholding the value of life.
She can fool the world, the press, her fans, the jet set, the intellectuals - everybody, but morality is not democratic or a question of popularity.
As such, being so popular and likeable, she is like a trojan, a virus, undermining, chipping away at what should be rock solid. Marriage is a sacrament between man and woman, a forever pledge and its purpose is the furtherance of life.
Race is 19th century pseudo-science, not reality. I don't think all the evidence is in yet on homosexuality, but I do know it (or something like it) is much more prevalent in nature than the 19th century Victorians would admit.
However: My church, too, teaches that active homosexuality is a sin. Love the sinner, and hate the sin, is about all we have left, here, I think. I used to watch Ellen's sitcom, and quit over the same thing that bothers many others here. I've also had gay friends who were otherwise good people. If she had to choose a serious sin to practice, maybe homosexuality is better than murder? Others can still make their choices around homosexuals, while murders take away all choices. Which is the “lesser of two evils” here?