Homophobia

"Hostility and discrimination against homosexual individuals are well-established facts (Berrill, 1990). On occasion, these negative attitudes lead to hostile verbal and physical acts against gay individuals with little apparent motivation except a strong dislike (Herek, 1989). In fact, more than 90% of gay men and lesbians report being targets of verbal abuse or threats, and more than one-third report being survivors of violence related to their homosexuality (Fassinger, 1991 ). Although negative attitudes and behaviors toward gay individuals have been assumed to be associated with rigid moralistic beliefs, sexual ignorance, and fear of homosexuality, the etiology of these attitudes and behaviors remains a puzzle (Marmor, 1980). Weinberg ( 1972 ) labeled these attitudes and behaviors homophobia, which he de- fined as the dread of being in close quarters with homosexual men and women as well as irrational fear, hatred, and intolerance by heterosexual individuals of homosexual men and women."

"Although the causes of homophobia are unclear, several psychoanalytic explanations have emerged from the idea of homo- phobia as an anxiety-based phenomenon. One psychoanalytic explanation is that anxiety about the possibility of being or be- coming a homosexual may be a major factor in homophobia (West, 1977). For example, de Kuyper (1993) has asserted that homophobia is the result of the remnants of homosexuality in the heterosexual resolution of the Oedipal conflict. Whereas these notions are vague, psychoanalytic theories usually postulate that homophobia is a result of repressed homosexual urges or a form of latent homosexuality. Latent homosexuality can be defined as homosexual arousal which the individual is either unaware of or denies (West, 1977 ). Psychoanalysts use the concept of repressed or latent homosexuality to explain the emotional malaise and irrational attitudes displayed by some individuals who feel guilty about their erotic interests and struggle to deny and repress homosexual impulses. In fact, West ( 1977, p. 202) stated, "when placed in a situation that threatens to excite their own unwanted homosexual thoughts, they over- react with panic or anger." Slaby (1994) contended that anxiety about homosexuality typically does not occur in individuals who are same-sex Oriented, but it usually involves individuals who are ostensibly heterosexual and have difficulty integrating their homosexual feelings or activity. The relationship between homophobia and latent homosexuality has not been empirically investigated and is one of the purposes of the present study."

"The results of this study indicate that individuals who score in the homophobic range and admit negative affect toward homosexuality demonstrate significant sexual arousal to male homosexual erotic stimuli. These individuals were selected on the basis of their report of having only heterosexual arousal and experiences. Furthermore, their ratings of erection and arousal to homosexual stimuli were low and not significantly different from nonhomophobic men who demonstrated no significant in- crease in penile response to homosexual stimuli. These data are consistent with response discordance where verbal judgments are not consistent with physiological reactivity, as in the case of homophobic individuals viewing homosexual stimuli. Lang (1994) has noted that the most dramatic response discordance occurs with reports of feeling and physiologic responses. An- other possible explanation is found in various psychoanalytic theories, which have generally explained homophobia as a threat to an individual's own homosexual impulses causing repression, denial, or reaction formation (or all three; West, 1977). Generally, these varied explanations conceive of homo- phobia as one type of latent homosexuality where persons either are unaware of or deny their homosexual urges. These data are consistent with these notions. Another explanation of these data is found in Barlow, Sakheim, and Beck's (1983) theory of the role of anxiety and attention in sexual responding. It is possible that viewing homosexual stimuli causes negative emotions such as anxiety in homo- phobic men but not in nonhomophobic men. Because anxiety has been shown to enhance arousal and erection, this theory would predict increases in erection in homophobic men. Furthermore, it would indicate that a response to homosexual stimuli is a function of the threat condition rather than sexual arousal per se. Whereas difficulties of objectively evaluating psychoanalytic hypotheses are well-documented, these approaches would predict that sexual arousal is an intrinsic response to homosexual stimuli, whereas Barlow's (1986) theory would predict that sexual arousal to homosexual stimuli by homophobic individuals is a function of anxiety. These competing notions can and should be evaluated by future research."

"So if a man and a woman do the same thing, the man is much more likely to be labeled a homosexual. The double standard was especially pronounced among the male students, and everyone knows how freaky guys get about male homosexuality. But you could find it in the thinking of both sexes. Why does the double standard exist? I suspect it's because people consider male homosexuality so much worse than female-female love making. The greater social taboo implies that if a guy does something seriously "homo," it says more about what he must be, about impulses he can't control, than it would say about a woman doing the same thing, because it's not condemned for women. It's a pernicious attribution, to be sure, but double standards are not known for their fairness. Neither, for that matter, is homophobia."

"Between June 2022 and April 2023, ADL and GLAAD documented at least 356 anti-LGBTQ+ extremist and non-extremist incidents motivated by hate across the United States. From demonstrations aiming to intimidate organizers and attendees at drag shows, to bomb threats against hospitals that offer health care for LGBTQ+ people to a mass shooting that took the lives of five people in Colorado, incidents of anti-LGBTQ+ hate and extremism are an important part of a larger story about the heightened threats facing the LGBTQ+ community in the United States today."

"Homophobia is gay."

"ON THE FRONT PAGE OF THE MARCH 31, 2005 edition of the New York Times, the editors ran an extraordinary photograph well above the fold and directly below the masthead. It showed a group of religious leaders meeting in Jerusalem the previous day: three Islamic muftis, a Sufi shiek, a Roman Catholic prelate, a Greek Orthodox and an Armenian patriarch, the Ashenazi chief rabbi, and the Sephardic chief rabbi. The purpose of their meeting? A long-overdue interfaith condemnation of religious violence in the Mideast? A call for the Israeli government to forswear the destruction of Palestinian homes in exchange for a pledge to discourage suicide bombers? A resolution against religious bigotry or an entreaty to end the maddening cycle of violence? Perhaps a summit to discuss the war in Iraq? Or the racially, religiously, and politically divisive effects of a huge wall that the Israeli government had been constructing to separate Jews from Palestinians? No. The religious leaders had gathered in Jerusalem to issue a joint statement of condemnation for a planned gay-pride festival in Jerusalem."

"Although it still exerts its ugly power, homophobia is old. All over the world, people are beginning to see that hatred and fear of people who are different from themselves are destructive to us all and instead are learning to welcome and celebrate our rich diversity. If this news has not yet reached your school, church, or town, it will. There's a whole new mentality being born. Society has controlled us by teaching us to hate ourselves. The voices of homophobia can demoralize us so effectively that we don't need anything beyond their constant judgement to make us feel ashamed. But you don't have to buy it. Through heroic acts of defiance, both in the delicate interior of the private mind and in the public world, gay and lesbian youth are casting off shame and the acceptance of second-class status and proclaiming their worth, their power, and their rightful place in the world."

"This is about a lot more than abortion. What happens if you have states change the law saying that children who are LGBTQ can’t be in classrooms with other children? Is that legit, under the way the decision is written? What are the next things that are going to be attacked?"

"The media misquoted me, saying that I called homosexuals garbage. That was not what I said. As I talked about our concern for the health and diet of our children and other people's children, I said, "If they are exposed to homosexuality, I might as well feed them garbage." I think there is a difference, but I leave it to the reader to interpret as you wish- we did not resort to name-calling at any time during the campaign in Miami."

"There are homosexual adults who are living irresponsibly, who in the name of "human rights" seek social rights that in reality only give them license for perversion and the flaunting of their deviant ways. To allow this to continue is only an indication that rather than being a great society, we are a sick society. Justice is delayed and far too often bypassed on the basis of legal technicalities in order to preserve an individual's "rights," but right has been made a mockery. To talk about the "rights" of someone who has chosen to rebel against responsible living is nonsense. It is simply not true that all human beings have the same rights. Some human beings throw away their rights by throwing away their responsibilities when we no longer dare say no and prove we mean it by enforcing it. The power of the law is an empty gesture. All end up turning their backs on crime and/or that which would thrust them into an unpopular stance with the powerful makers of public opinion- the media."

"We heard from blacks, Spanish-speaking people, and others of many nationalities and religious backgrounds. The legitimate minority groups protested against homosexuals waving the flag of human rights. They called homosexuality by its right name- a perverted, unnatural, and ungodly lifestyle."

"I repeat my belief: Homosexuals do not suffer discrimination when they keep their perversions in the privacy of their homes. They can hold any job, transact any business, join any organization- so long as they do not flaunt their homosexuality and try to establish role models for the impressionable young people- our children. I will continue to fight the attempts of Metro, and the attempts of a few Congressmen who on February 2 presented a similar type of bill in the Congress of the United States to legitimize homosexuality. Homosexuals cannot reproduce- so they must recruit. And to freshen their ranks, they must recruit the youth of America. I shall continue to fight against that recruitment. Those who do not share my conviction may continue to blacklist my talent- but with God's help, they can never blacken my name."

"None of my friends are homophobic. I’ve never had a negative response from Will & Grace... and I’ve never hesitated about anything artistic. This is 2008, you know? Things are different now... or, at least they should be. We’re all God’s children. Enough already with homophobic people... they just don’t get it."

"Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

"The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition."

"Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection."

"The lack of multiple references doesn't disturb the person who has a sense of theological realism. Such a person is aware that the Bible could hardly be more explicit in its condemnation of homosexual behavior (e.g. Romans 1:26-32), but those who want to justify homosexual behavior simply dismiss the biblical texts as not relevant to today or interpret St. Paul to mean "promiscuous" sodomy although St. Paul makes no such distinctions. Even if the Bible were filled with explicit condemnations of abortion, sterilization, and contraception, the same approach would be used on such texts by those who wished to justify such behavior as compatible with biblical Christianity. Thus it is the belief of the Roman Catholic faith and of many other Christians that Jesus did not leave us with only a book subject to everyone's personal and sometimes contradictory interpretations but also established His Church as an authoritative teacher guided by the Holy Spirit. The constant teaching by the Church on a matter of faith and morals is called Tradition."

"There can be little doubt that, as far as they thought of the matter at all, Marx and Engels were personally homophobic, as shown by an acerbic 1869 exchange of letters on Jean-Baptiste von Schweitzer, a German socialist rival. Schweitzer had been arrested in a park on a morals charge and not only did Marx and Engels refuse to join a committee defending him, they resorted to the cheapest form of bathroom humor in their private comments about the affair."

"As early as the 1920s leaders of Western Communist parties began to float the idea that the public discussion of homosexuality, and the seeming increase in homosexual activity, resulted from the decadence of capitalism in its death throes. Homosexuality was to disappear in the healthy new society of the future."

"Homophobia still often rests on the prejudice that the worthiest form of sexuality is that which is capable of reproduction."

"America is a different country now, a dozen years on from what Frank Rich described in 1999 as "[t]he homophobic epidemic of '98, which spiked with the October murder of Matthew Shepard." After a decade of legislative fighting, federal hate crimes legislation was finally extended to protect gay people in 2009. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed as a rider to the National Defense Reauthorization Act and was signed into law by President Obama during his first year in office. The president has done an "It Gets Better" video; so too have the White House staff and some leading Democrats in the United States Senate. Gay marriage is legal in nine states and the District of Columbia; "Don't ask, don't tell" has been overturned; America has elected its first openly lesbian U.S. Senator -- and from the Midwest! -- and even the president backs same-sex marriage rights. America is a different country now. But the "Stone Age," as Jodi Foster has called it, in which gay people were seen as perverts justifiably targeted for violence or invective, is a none too distant a memory, and in too many quarters it is still extremely difficult for people -- especially very young people -- to be out and gay without experiencing severe social, physical, or economic repercussions (as the documentary Bully showed this past year, in case any one had any doubt). Today, according to Washington Post-ABC News polling, 58 percent support gay marriage, up from 41 percent in 2004, while opposition has dropped from 55 to 36 percent. A March CNN/ORC International survey puts the jump as an increase from 40 to 56 percent support from 2007 through 2013."

"And so the question arises: How does America address its homophobic past as it moves forward into a more tolerant future? If American views on gays have changed -- and they have, with shocking rapidity -- that means there are a lot of people in this country who used to hold more deeply anti-gay views than they do today, and who may be ashamed of what they once thought and said in what now seems a distant and unenlightened era. Two thirds of the change in views on gay marriage comes from "individuals' modifying their views over time" and only "one-third was due to a cohort succession effect, or later cohorts replacing earlier ones," according to sociologist Dawn Michelle Baunach, who looked into the issue in a 2011 Social Science Quarterly piece. Most such people have had the privilege of a private life, where their participation in an ugly ideology that diminished and damaged gay people is something they speak of only in conversation with friends, or recall within the inmost sanctuary of their own thoughts. But some people have been living public lives a long time, and have left a very public paper trail of their expressions of discomfort and distaste. What is the proper response to the discovery of such information? How do we as a society react when people openly change their views in public on gays, and on same-sex marriage? And are we finally ready to get beyond the politics of the mid-1990s?"

"What's happening now is a wholesale repudiation of the 1990s move to eject gay people from the American family, writ large. The reason for DOMA was anti-gay animus by a group of men who showed their respect for marriage by divorcing multiple times and having affairs. The reason to undo DOMA is a rejection of that animus, and the growing recognition there is no way to argue against same-sex marriage that is not ultimately an argument for the moral inferiority of gay people. As of Friday, only four Democrats in the U.S. Senate had not come out in favor of gay marriage. "I have concluded the federal government should no longer discriminate against people who want to make lifelong, loving commitments to each other or interfere in personal, private, and intimate relationships," Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota said. "I view the ability of anyone to marry as a logical extension of this belief." The reason to not support gay marriage is the lingering sense that there's something strange or not right about it. That it's fine for gay people to do what they want in privacy, but that their relationships are not the same as straight ones. Not as powerful, not as loving, not as legitimate. "[T]his is the inevitable extension of my efforts to promote equality and opportunity for everyone," said Sen. Mark Warner in announcing his new views. "[A]s many of my gay and lesbian friends, colleagues and staff embrace long term committed relationships, I find myself unable to look them in the eye without honestly confronting this uncomfortable inequality," observed Senator Claire McCaskill in a Tumblr post."

"The 1990s are over. Newt Gingrich, who stepped down as House Speaker after the Republicans performed poorly at the polls in 1998, in 2012 lost his comeback bid and the Republican presidential primary. Former representative Bob Barr, the sponsor of DOMA in 1996, in 2009 recanted his support for the bill and said gays should be allowed to marry. Bill Clinton -- who signed it the bill with a statement saying "I have long opposed governmental recognition of same-gender marriages" -- has too. But if that moment of moralism in the mid-90s deserves to be remembered, it's for the lesson that the American people, when they stop being upset about an issue, really let it go. Clinton was impeached over his infidelity, but he hung on to office and became one of the most beloved ex-presidents ever. His party even won seats in the House and Senate the same year his scandal dominated the news, as the public defied political predictions and turned against the moralists instead of the man they accused. As the drumbeat of shifting views of gay marriage continues, each voice affirms gay people as part of the American family, and each senator freshly legitimizes gay Americans as he or she repudiates past views or clarifies new ones. Whatever happens with the Supreme Court, this moment of change and affirmation -- this moment of public evolution -- is having a power all its own."

"I actually got a Ugandan Minister to say, on camera— he's the Minister of Ethics and Integrity, it's the only such ministry in the world— and I said to him, "Look, even if these three utterly false supports on which you base your homophobia are true, which they aren't, there's so much more to worry about in your country than the odd gay person going to bed with the other gay person. For example, you have almost an epidemic of child rape in this country, which is just frightening." And he said, "Ah, but it is the right kind of child rape." I said, "That was on camera. Do you know that was on camera?" He said, "Yes." I said, "Can you just explain what you meant?" "Well, it is men raping girls. Which is natural.""

"And the attacks on queer people just keep coming. In May 2023, the Human Rights Campaign listed anti-queer bills introduced and passed in this year alone: • Over 520 anti-LGBTQ+ bills have been introduced in state legislatures, a record; • Over 220 bills specifically target transgender and non-binary people, also a record; and • A record 74 anti-LGBTQ laws have been enacted so far this year, including: • Laws banning gender affirming care for transgender youth: 16 • Laws requiring or allowing misgendering of transgender students: 7 • Laws targeting drag performances: 2 • Laws creating a license to discriminate: 3 • Laws censoring school curricula, including books: 13 We’re not paranoid. They really do want us to disappear."

"Though they’re starting to say the quiet part out loud, even in this country, they’ve been so much less careful in Africa for decades now. It’s not all that uncommon today for right-wing Christians in the United States to publicly demand that LGBT people be put to death. As recently as Pride month (June) of last year, in a sermon that went viral on Tik-Tok, Pastor Joe Jones of Shield of Faith Baptist Church in Boise, Idaho, called for all gay people to be executed. Local NBC and CBS TV stations, along with some national affiliates, saw fit to amplify Jones’s demand to “put them to death. Put all queers to death” by interviewing him in prime time. In keeping with right-wing propaganda that treats queer people as child predators, Jones sees killing gays as the key to preventing the sexual abuse of children. “When they die,” he said, “that stops the pedophilia. It’s a very, very simple process.” (The reality is that most sexual abuse of children involves male perpetrators and girl victims and happens inside families.) Though American “Christians” like Jones may be years away, if ever, from instituting the death penalty for queer people here, they have already been far more successful in Africa. On May 29, Ugandan president Yoweri Museveni signed perhaps the world’s harshest anti-LGBT law, criminalizing all homosexual activity, providing the death penalty for “serial offenders,” and according to the Reuters news agency, for the “transmission of a terminal illness like HIV/AIDS through gay sex.” It also “decrees a 20-year sentence for ‘promoting’ homosexuality.” While Uganda’s new anti-gay law may be the most extreme on the continent, more than 30 other African countries already outlaw homosexuality to varying degrees."

"Whenever I hear some bigmouth in Washington or the Christian heartland banging on about the evils of sodomy or whatever, I mentally enter his name in my notebook and contentedly set my watch. Sooner rather than later, he will be discovered down on his weary and well-worn old knees in some dreary motel or latrine, with an expired Visa card, having tried to pay well over the odds to be peed upon by some Apache transvestite."

"I will not stay silent when I spot racism," Jones, 49, said during her speech, delivered at the city's Omega Center. "I will not stay silent when I spot homophobia or transphobia. I will not stay silent when I spot xenophobia. I will not stay silent when I spot religious intolerance. I will not stay silent when I spot any injustice.""

"In the eyes of Castro and his revolutionary comrade Che Guevara — who frequently referred to gay men as maricones, “faggots” — homosexuality was inherently counterrevolutionary, a bourgeois decadence."

"Openly homosexual people were prevented from joining the Communist Party and fired from their jobs. One of the country’s most distinguished writers, Reinaldo Arenas, recounted the prison experience he and countless other gay men endured in his memoir Before Night Falls. “It was a sweltering place without a bathroom,” he wrote. “Gays were not treated like human beings, they were treated like beasts. They were the last ones to come out for meals, so we saw them walk by, and the most insignificant incident was an excuse to beat them mercilessly.”"

"But beyond the personal realm, there is another dimension to homophobia. It's the natural repulsion and fear we feel against the gay movement. It is not primarily directed against a person, but it can become confused and directed against an individual who becomes for us symbolic of the gay movement. We are pushed on all sides by the movement. Our world is being invaded by those who are forcing us to accept open homosexuality and call it good. We become angry and defensive. We find ourselves falling back into the sin of homophobia, especially when we feel militant homosexuals are attacking our sources of security. We want to strike out in defense against them."

"In school, perhaps more than at home (which is why parents are sometimes appalled when they catch their kids unawares among their friends), both masculinity and femininity are narrow balancing beams, easy to tumble off. Girls must appear amenable to sex but not too amenable. If a girl is standoffish or proud, she is a "bitch." But if she talks too dirty or behaves too lasciviously, she's a "slut" or a "ho." A boy who does the latter is admired as a "player." If he does the latter toward girls, that is. Because if a boy is shy or insufficiently enthusiastic about, say, discussing the size of a classmate's breasts, he can find himself ostracized as a "faggot." Masculinity is policed chiefly by boys against other boys, and homophobia is its billy club."

""Anything that is feminine, boys learn to reject- sensitivity, empathy, vulnerability," said Deborah Rakowsky, a guidance counselor in a suburban middle school. But this is not just a phenomenon of lockstep suburban conformity. Carol Kapuscik, the mother of a seventeen-year-old male skateboarding fanatic named Max, described how her son participated in casual gay-bashing, even though he had grown up in the sexually iconoclastic Lower East Side of New York, with many gay and lesbian family friends and neighbors (the waitresses at the corner restaurant are drag queens). "Everything they denigrate is 'faggot,'" said Carol. "That's a 'faggot' movie, 'faggot' pants, a 'faggot' video game. I've even heard them refer to certain foods as 'faggot.'" She did not think her son uses the term against other boys but said, "Even though they throw the word around like it was nothing, when a kid is called a faggot, it really has the power to sting." No wonder few gay or lesbian kids have the wherewithal to be "out" in junior high school or high school. As a straight boy who graduated from high school in rural Vermont told me, "Everybody called everybody 'faggot' or 'queer.' But there were no gay people at school." I imagine his second observation was wrong."

"One of Feinstein's main exercises in the classroom is the open expression of caring for friends- what she calls "put-ups," the antonym of "put-downs." Homophobia stands foursquare in the way of boys' showing their affection to each other. But she persists, and the put-ups get closer to their intended mark. "At first, the boys will think and think and say something like, 'You play sports good.'" Eventually though, they begin to use the exercise not only to assess another person positively but also to acknowledge a relationship. "More and more, they'll say things like 'You've helped me with math. You've been a good friend.'" Feinstein thinks the homophobic restraints on masculine affection might also thwart boys' playfulness and tenderness in heterosexual sex- and that learning to express closeness openly could do the opposite."

"Homophobia: The fear of feelings of love for members of one’s own sex and therefore the hatred of those feelings in others."

"When I was in the military they gave me a medal for killing two men, and a discharge for loving one."

"For at least 8 years, Republican domestic policies have demonstrated that man is capable of doing good only in an atmosphere of liberty and faith, not compulsion and atheism. However, man's basic nature is inclined towards evil, and when the exercise of liberty takes the shape of pornography, drug abuse, or homosexuality, the government must restrain, punish, and deter."

"Another legislative initiative at the onset of the Reagan Revolution was the Family Protection Act of 1981, the first sweeping policy aimed at limiting government intervention in many areas of family life and bolstering the conjugal, two-parent family as normative. The Act provided for a variety of traditional family support measures such as a restriction of federal funds for abortion, a restraint of federal interference with state statutes pertaining to child abuse, a redefinition of abuse to exclude parental spanking, and a prohibition of funds for homosexual legal services and other anti-family activities. The act incorporates sound principles of federalism and self-government, while refusing to acknowledge homosexuality and abortion as acceptable behaviors and actions. It is noteworthy that these latter two issues are even framed in the context of family policy, a noticeable omission of Democratic policy makers, who discuss these as issues of personal liberty distinct from the family. The Republican vision is cognizant of immorality and the attack on family values as the root of otherwise secular social problems, and the legislative response demonstrates an unwillingness to [legitimize] those actions which are both cause and effect of family breakdown."

"Fight any attempts to redefine family by allowing special rights for homosexuals or single-parent unwed mothers."

"In the sexual orientation context, complicity-based conscience claims, which are beginning to proliferate, have been modeled on healthcare refusals. As religious groups opposing same-sex marriage suffer losses in politics and litigation, critics of same-sex marriage, including the Manhattan Declaration’s Robert George, encourage them to look to the abortion context for a model for long-term change. The abortion example illustrates how to resist legal settlement of conflict. As Ryan Anderson wrote in National Review, “we must . . . make clear that court-imposed same-sex marriage via a Roe-style decision will not settle the marriage debate any more than it has settled the abortion debate.” He immediately pivoted to religious freedom: “What-ever the Court does will cause less damage if we . . . highlight the importance of religious liberty. Even if the Court were to redefine marriage, government should not require third parties to recognize a same-sex relationship as a marriage.” It is not accidental that at the very moment general arguments for “traditional marriage” are failing, Anderson urges claims on religious liberty. As Anderson emphasizes, the abortion context illustrates how creative advocacy can adapt to conditions of loss. Unsurprisingly, then, conscience clauses secured in the abortion domain have become an aspiration for same-sex marriage opponents."

"[S]ocial conservatives long used arguments from traditional morality to oppose recognizing same-sex relationships. 180 But these arguments about lesbians and gay men now sound illegitimate—like “bigotry.” In response, advocates have changed the secular rationale for their position in ways that give increasingly uninhibited expression to its religious logic. Advocates now emphasize different justifications for excluding same-sex couples from marriage —for example, that marriage is about biological procreation or that preserving “traditional marriage” protects religious liberty. At the same time, in anticipation of the possibility of defeat, they argue for exemptions from laws that recognize same-sex marriage. In so doing, they shift from speaking as a majority enforcing customary morality to speaking as a minority seeking exemptions based on religious identity. As in the case of healthcare refusals, these claims for religious exemption have spread and expanded through the concept of complicity. Many states that allow same-sex couples to marry have enacted legislation making clear that religious denominations and clergy have no obligation to solemnize a same-sex marriage. These actors can be analogized to the doctors and nurses covered by the healthcare refusal laws who object to performing abortions or sterilizations. But as with healthcare refusals, advocates draw on concepts of complicity to seek exemptions for those who object to facilitating or sanctioning another’s sinful conduct. Ryan Anderson describes the expanding sequence of these claims: “Some will conclude that they cannot in good conscience participate in same-sex ceremonies, from priests and pastors to bakers and florists.”"

"As recent litigation illustrates, business owners working in wedding-related fields are asserting complicity-based objections to serving same-sex couples. Jack Phillips, the owner of Denver’s Masterpiece Cakes, turned away same-sex couples because he “believes that the Bible commands him . . . not to encourage sin in any way.” He contended that baking and selling a cake for a same- sex wedding would force him to “participate” in a sinful same-sex relation- ship. Similarly, owners of an Iowa art gallery used as an event space turned away a same-sex couple because “their religious beliefs prevent them from . . . facilitating . . . same-sex wedding ceremonies.” Moreover, through concepts of complicity, these exemption claims move beyond wedding-related services. For example, legislative proposals supported by social conservative advocacy groups would allow some for-profit employers who seek to avoid complicity in their employees’ sinful conduct to refuse to provide health insurance that covers employees’ same-sex spouses."

"In states with antidiscrimination laws that cover sexual orientation, religious objections to same-sex marriage have provided a basis on which to seek the expansion of already-existing exemptions in the laws. For instance, enacting an exemption that allows an institution or individual to refuse to “facilitate the perpetuation” or “treat as valid” a same-sex couple’s marriage would significantly broaden existing exemptions to permit sexual orientation discrimination in situations that have nothing to do with weddings. In states without antidiscrimination laws covering sexual orientation, lawmakers have worked to restrict any future nondiscrimination obligations that may exist. While framed around marriage, the proposed legislation would allow businesses to refuse to serve same-sex couples more generally."

"On December 6th, 1998, a kiss between two guys was aired on primetime television in North America for the very first time. 24 years later, the show it aired on is seeing a resurgence, but the gay character involved in this historic first is nowhere to be found. Where exactly did he go? In the eleventh episode of That ’70s Show‘s debut season, Point Place High welcomed a new student, Buddy Morgan, played by 3rd Rock From the Sun star Joseph Gordon-Levitt. This cameo saw the star playing a popular, cool, well-off student who gets assigned as main character Eric’s lab partner. The two make fast friends, to the point of Eric neglecting his main friend group just to be around Buddy. Meanwhile, Buddy has spent the whole time developing a massive crush on his new pal. This culminates in a scene where Eric is venting about his “confusing” relationship with his main love interest Donna — venting that Buddy cuts off halfway through with a kiss. Buddy was allegedly planned to have a recurring part, but the character vanished without a trace following mixed reception from viewers. Reactions supposedly ranged from the typical overt homophobia to discomfort with Eric’s reaction to this kiss, as well as some feeling that the character’s queerness was played for laughs. What they seem to have failed to consider is Joseph Gordon-Levitt’s cute little face. A shocking oversight, but not everyone has taste."

"This landmark moment could’ve easily gone on to live in the “This was my Heartstopper” canon, but instead was pushed by the wayside after one brief introduction. Even as the episode ends with the two hoping to stay friends, Gordon-Levitt was instead written off the show. The series didn’t see another gay character until a pair of neighbors eight seasons later, and even Jeff and Josh were mostly comic relief characters meant to make Eric’s straight-laced father Red uncomfortable. Meanwhile, upcoming sequel series That ’90s Show has already announced a gay character as part of the main friend group. Barb and Star Go to Vista Del Mar‘s Reyn Doi plays Ozzie, a series regular described as “insightful and sarcastic” as well as “impatient with the world for not being as accepting as his friends.” We don’t see any reason why the new series couldn’t feature a JGL/Topher Grace reunion and maybe ret-con a few things. After all, Gordon-Levitt holds decades later that Grace was a “good dude to kiss“. Now excuse us while we go cry for what should’ve been."

"Our love of lockstep is our greatest curse, the source of all that bedevils us. It is the source of homophobia, xenophobia, racism, sexism, terrorism, bigotry of every variety and hue, because it tells us there is one right way to do things, to look, to behave, to feel, when the only right way is to feel your heart hammering inside you and to listen to what its timpani is saying."

"Don't hide behind the Constitution or the Bible. If you're against gay marriage, just be honest, put a scarlet 'H' on your shirt, and say, 'I am a homophobe!'"

"Our considerations here may shed further light on the question of whether one can validly speak about a same-sex 'marriage'. Our endeavor is to offer an anthropological analysis of the conjugal act by means of which spouses uniquely express their mutual self-giving. We are dealing with one of the most profound realities of human life. Our arguments have been human, not theological, because we consider that clear human thinking, if it probes sincerely and deeply enough, can of itself (without any recourse to theology) show how contraceptive sexual intercourse is not marital intercourse at all, has no power to signify spousal union, but rather contradicts it. Contraceptive intercourse in heterosexual marriage 'denies the truth' of conjugal love through a radical falsification of the very act which should give the fullest bodily expression to that love. The reasoning we have followed underlines the human hollowness of the idea of a "homosexual marriage". Homosexual acts can appease physical desire; but they can never - even remotely - signify the self-giving of two persons. Nor can they effect their union; the two are simply not made "one flesh". Homosexual acts are an exercise in emptiness, satisfying individual passion but leaving the persons as separate as before; nothing in the act unites them. Only a dualistic culture that chooses to see no natural and intrinsic connection between body and soul could wish to dub a homosexual relationship as a marriage."