# Conservatives: Do you believe in social progress? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 25, 2018, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687 "2018-12-25T16:49:19Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 6:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/141 "2019-01-17T18:08:48Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > The other thing you’re missing is, it’s not about the cake. Cakes are trivial. Nobody’s life is ruined by not having a cake. But being refused medical care isn’t trivial. Being thrown out of your home isn’t trivial. Getting fired from your job isn’t trivial. Those are the sort of things that these anti-discrimination laws are meant to fight. Exactly right. And notice how conservatives keep making it be about cakes. They want the issue of gay rights to stay on a trivial level, because it gets harder to defend discrimination when you start talking about real businesses. Trivialities are also good for distracting voters who might otherwise be asking tough questions. Questions like, golly gee, how do laws that make it easier for businesses to discriminate against LGBT help the average person… - find prosperous jobs - become educated without going into crushing debt - live in an environment that isn’t polluted with toxic substances - have access to medical care - have a safety net in case of tragedy and unemployment - not live in poverty during retirement or disabillty - be protected from unscrupulous and fraudulent business practices - be an active, engaged participant in our democracy …in other words, progress? Why should anyone except bigoted cake makers care enough to defend and argue for this kind of “freedom”, when we have so many other problems to tackle that have a much greater effect on quality of life. There is no horde of cake-buying gays trying to scorch the Earth for this thing. And yet this issue–and similar trivialities–is what conservative discourse would lead you to believe is pressing and important. Not people going into bankruptcy because of medical bills. Not the rising cost of housing and its effects on the working poor. Individual conservatives may sincerely believe in social progress, but all too often the issues consuming their attention have nothing to do with progress. It’s as if that is by design. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/142 "2019-01-17T18:33:11Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > If that Christian says, “Hey, I have no problem with adulterers. Here you go,” that’s certainly within his rights, but I think a Christian who is serious about his faith would have quite a problem with that. That’s one view. Another view is that a devout Christian could take to heart the message in the New Testament that _everyone_ is a sinner, and thus, discriminating against gays while ignoring others goes against Matthew 7:1-3: > [@](#): > > 7 Judge not, that ye be not judged. > > 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. > > 3 **And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?** ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 6:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/143 "2019-01-17T18:35:47Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Exactly right. And notice how conservatives keep making it be about cakes. They want the issue of gay rights to stay on a trivial level, because it gets harder to defend discrimination when you start talking about real businesses. I don’t think it was a conservative who sued the cake bakery. If it is a trivial example, that’s not because conservatives started it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/144 "2019-01-17T18:44:17Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > I never understood where this was coming from. Let’s say I walked into a bakery and asked for a cake that said, “Jesus is Lord”, and the owner was this real anti-religion fanatic. Thought religion birthed all manner of misery over nothing, was a destructive force that needs to be eradicated. Real passionate about it. Let’s say he refuses, won’t make the cake. I am not going to feel like a second class citizen, I’m going to recognize that this person has real strong disagreements with how I live my life, and that this isn’t the place to have my cake made. > > The issue would clearly be with him, not me. Again, I wouldn’t feel like a second class citizen at all. I would hastily move on to another, more amenable baker. > > I can’t understand why LGBT people do not also view the matter as such. Clearly if the baker has some issue with baking a cake for a gay wedding, that’s not an indictment on the customer. Unless we measure the worth of people in society based upon whether or not a business owner reserves the right to refuse them service. You’re missing a critical point: If I refuse to bake a cake that says JESUS IS LORD, I’m expressing my disagreement with _what you believe_. If I refuse to bake a cake that says CONGRATS BOB AND STEVE, I’m expressing my disagreement with _who you are_. I’d be pissed at either baker, but can you see where the second example is more noxious than the first? ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/145 "2019-01-17T18:45:48Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > So a couple points. One, these bakers in question are not refusing to serve them because they’re gay, they’re refusing to bake specific cakes. They are refusing to serve specific cakes only to gay people. That’s discriminating against gay people. > [@](#): > > There are no businesses in the news that are outright refusing service if they find out a person is gay. That’s trivially easy to prove [wrong.](https://www.11alive.com/article/news/investigations/legal-discrimination-this-is-one-of-the-most-blatant-that-weve-seen/85-599865230) > [@](#): > > Point number two: These places with widespread discrimination don’t exist. This isn’t 1960. There are no areas where vast swaths of the businesses refuse gay- or Christian-themed creations. Also wrong, in many, many way. Firstly, there were no LGBT legal protections anywhere in the country until 1973, so your baseline is off by more than a decade. Secondly, federal law actively discriminated against gay people up until 2015, when DOMA was repealed. (And if you want to argue that DOMA didn’t represent discrimination against gays, fine - Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was federal law until 2010). Before _Obergefell_, thirty states had anti-gay discrimination enshrined in their constitutions - including _California._ LGBT rights in this country are very new, and very fragile. The fight against discriminatory state-level “bathroom bills” is ongoing - eighteen states currently have these laws on the books. > [@](#): > > Well, this is sort of a slippery slope, that if we allow a Christian baker to refuse to bake a cake for a gay wedding that this will somehow lead to gay people unable to rent homes or get hired. This is not analogous because refusing to rent to gay people or hire them would be akin to refusing to bake a cake for a gay person outright, which isn’t the case. Arguing that allowing Christian bakeries the right not to bake a gay wedding cake (even if they gladly serve gay customers otherwise) will lead to them possibly not being able to rent homes or get hired is not a reasonable fear in my estimation. Such wholesale discrimination would be condemned widely, and the courts would never move such laws forward. Again, the contention is about the specific product; it is not about a “We don’t serve gays here” sign outside the bakery. It’s absolutely not a slippery slope - it’s the entire reason this is an issue in the first place. If a baker can say, “I won’t sell him a cake because he’s gay,” why can’t a landlord say, “I won’t rent him an apartment because he’s gay?” Why can’t an employer say, “I won’t hire him because he’s gay?” The US legal system is based on precedent, and once you’ve set a precedent that religious beliefs can exempt you from following anti-discrimination laws, then that argument can be applied to any sector of the public. Many states have absolutely no legal protections for LGBT people. Two states, Tennessee and Arkansas, have actually made it illegal to pass non-discrimination laws protecting LGBT people. And yeah, people are still facing [employment](https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/national-international/Miami-Catholic-School-Teacher-Says-She-Was-Fired-for-Being-Gay-473634293.html) and [housing](https://beyondido.org/states/north-dakota/) discrimination for being gay. > [@](#): > > They’re really not, not if you’re serious about your faith. Just speaking about Christianity, the Bible is quite clear about it. Only by cherry picking Scripture or selectively omitting problematic passages can a Christian come to the conclusion that engaging in that behavior is “no problem”. And plenty of Christians do that. But for a Christian who is serious about their faith, the Bible (particularly the New Testament from which they draw a great deal of instruction) is replete with admonitions about sexual sin, including fornication, adultery, and homosexual behavior. I’m not taking a side here, but your vision for the future requires Christianity as a whole to become watered down on a massive scale. The idea that Christians who are not bigots aren’t “real” Christians is absolute, utter horseshit. I’ve marched in gay rights rallies next to literal Dominican monks. If a guy who gives up all of his worldly possessions to dedicate his life in service to Christ isn’t “serious” about his faith, then nobody on this entire fucking planet is serious about their faith. The actual scriptural support for anti-gay discrimination is incredibly thin - the obsession among conservative Christians with gay people is purely a political invention. > [@](#): > > I personally don’t think that’s likely. I think there will always be devout Christians who read their Bible, read what it says, believe in the instruction, and refuse to waver. As you pointed out, some people stood by their faith so strongly they burned at the stake for it. And there are always going to be devout Christians who read their Bible, read what it says, and find no basis for discriminating against gay people there. And they are every bit as devout a Christian as Franklin fucking Graham. Christianity is not defined by its hatred of gay people, and it’s massively offensive to the millions of devout, non-bigot Christians out there to pretend like their faith is less because they believing in treating everyone fairly. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/146 "2019-01-17T19:13:09Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t think it was a conservative who sued the cake bakery. If it is a trivial example, that’s not because conservatives started it. > > Regards, > Shodan You missed the point entirely but this doesn’t surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/147 "2019-01-17T19:29:01Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > In other words, you want only those freedoms that you believe to be subjectively good. Which, of course, appears to be true of you. Even most conservatives don’t think unlimited discrimination in commercial endeavours is acceptable, but it’s always conservatives who want to draw the line really recently. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/148 "2019-01-17T19:46:59Z")
> [@SamuelA](#): > > What you’re saying is basically that the State would take the role of private families. It would be responsible for taking care of people. “cradle to grave”. I think this is a bigger ideological difference than being for or against social progress. Classically, conservatives aren’t against social progress at all, but rather are very skeptical of governments in general, and specifically opposed to expanding the government’s purview into things they consider out of scope for a government, and for private industry and private citizens to work out. Or for that matter, are just entirely out of the purview of the government, and view interventions in the name of progressive causes as a worse sin than what they’re trying to redress. The cake baking is a good example- the conservative idea there is that the baker should be allowed to choose who he does business with, and in what way he chooses, based on the tenets of his religion. If he doesn’t agree with homosexuality, then he should be free to not do business with them, or to produce things that celebrate it. The conservatives view governmental intervention to force the baker to make a gay cake as far worse than the alternative. It’s the idea that the government is intervening in a private affair and making the baker go against his personal choice and conscience that is the most offensive part to them. Now a lot of latter day conservatives aren’t that nuanced, and are bigots and jerks, but the classical objection would be the one I described above. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/149 "2019-01-17T19:49:58Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > You missed the point entirely but this doesn’t surprise me. I don’t think I did. If lawsuits about gay wedding cakes are a distraction from real problems, it isn’t conservatives who are creating the distraction. > [@](#): > > - find prosperous jobs > - become educated without going into crushing debt > - live in an environment that isn’t polluted with toxic substances > - have access to medical care > - have a safety net in case of tragedy and unemployment > - not live in poverty during retirement or disabillty > - be protected from unscrupulous and fraudulent business practices > - be an active, engaged participant in our democracy How does suing a baker over a gay wedding cake further these goals? Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Delayed\_Reflex](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/delayed_reflex/32/3172_2.png) [@Delayed\_Reflex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Delayed_Reflex)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/150 "2019-01-17T20:22:40Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > And your item 5, the _Heller_ ruling, is just catastrophically regressive. The US gun homicide rate [is more than 22 times higher](http://www.bradycampaign.org/about-gun-violence) than the average in other high-income countries. That’s not a few percentage points. It’s a national tragedy. The CDC concluded that more children die of gunshots in the US than the total in 12 other comparable countries _ **combined** _. According to a Pew survey, nearly half of Americans – 44% – personally know someone who has been shot. Those are the kinds of numbers you might expect in a war zone, not in a putatively peaceful country. There are some parallels to be drawn between gun control and the prohibition of alcohol, however. My understanding is that prohibition was seen as a “progressive” movement in the 20’s, targeted at protecting society from the ills of excessive alcohol consumption. Would a new prohibition movement be seen as progressive again today? People should have the right to not get run over by a drunk driver, in the same way that people have a right to not get shot. One could argue that several “progressive” movements throughout history ultimately had a negative impact on society, despite the movements having goals aimed at improving society - prohibition, eugenics, communism, among others. I would assume that current conservatives are concerned that today’s progressive movements could similarly have negative outcomes (either intended or unintended). ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/151 "2019-01-17T20:40:42Z")
> [@bump](#): > > The cake baking is a good example- the conservative idea there is that the baker should be allowed to choose who he does business with, and in what way he chooses, based on the tenets of his religion. If _ **he doesn’t agree with homosexuality** _, then he should be free to not do business with them, or to produce things that celebrate it. (emphasis mine) This is what many people still don’t get. _ **Homosexuality is not something you can agree or disagree with** _. Saying “I don’t believe in homosexuality” is like saying “I don’t believe in being black.” Objecting to gays getting married is no different from objecting to blacks getting married – it’s denying them the same basic personhood that everyone deserves. I have no idea, really, if the law should compel a baker who calls himself a devout Christian to bake a cake congratulating a gay couple on their marriage. But I don’t need the law to tell me that a baker who refuses on the basis of “not believing in homosexuality” is an asshole and a bigot. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/152 "2019-01-17T20:50:11Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I don’t think I did. If lawsuits about gay wedding cakes are a distraction from real problems, it isn’t conservatives who are creating the distraction. Conservatives distract themselves from more socially important things when they use their time and energy defending wedding cake discrimination. You may think progressives are distracting themselves the same way, but they aren’t because in addition to caring about the environment, social justice, healthcare access, etc., they also use their time and energy fighting discrimination at large. Not just wedding cake discrimination, but discrimination that can actually make people destitute. I don’t know why you think it matters who initiated the baker lawsuit. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/153 "2019-01-17T21:04:07Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > (emphasis mine) > > This is what many people still don’t get. _ **Homosexuality is not something you can agree or disagree with** _. > > Saying “I don’t believe in homosexuality” is like saying “I don’t believe in being black.” Objecting to gays getting married is no different from objecting to blacks getting married – it’s denying them the same basic personhood that everyone deserves. > > I have no idea, really, if the law should compel a baker who calls himself a devout Christian to bake a cake congratulating a gay couple on their marriage. But I don’t need the law to tell me that a baker who refuses on the basis of “not believing in homosexuality” is an asshole and a bigot. Bad word choice on my part; what I was trying to get at is that there are people out there who for whatever reason (usu. religious) will have no truck with various social things- unmarried people, gays, transgender people, etc… And they’re bigots for sure, religious or not. But my point was that the classically conservative viewpoint would view the government intervention to compel the baker to bake the case as a cure that’s worse than the disease. And that’s a reasonable viewpoint; not everyone out there holds that discrimination, racism and bigotry are the chief things that the government should concern itself with. They’re not going to dispute that those things are wrong, but will definitely disagree about their priority or necessity as far as things the government should be worrying about. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/154 "2019-01-17T21:04:45Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > How does suing a baker over a gay wedding cake further these goals? A progressive wouldn’t ask that question. They’d ask "What might result if we allow businesses to refuse service to people for being gay and what impact might that have on people’s access to things like employment, medical care, the democratic process, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/155 "2019-01-17T21:29:37Z")
> [@bump](#): > > Bad word choice on my part; what I was trying to get at is that there are people out there who for whatever reason (usu. religious) will have no truck with various social things- unmarried people, gays, transgender people, etc… Thanks for not taking my strident reply as a personal insult! > [@](#): > > And they’re bigots for sure, religious or not. But my point was that the classically conservative viewpoint would view the government intervention to compel the baker to bake the case as a cure that’s worse than the disease. > > And that’s a reasonable viewpoint; not everyone out there holds that discrimination, racism and bigotry are the chief things that the government should concern itself with. **They’re not going to dispute that those things are wrong, but will definitely disagree about their priority or necessity as far as things the government should be worrying about.** **Emphasis mine.** I really like the way you phrase this. I truly hope that not everyone who disagrees with me on these issues is not an irredeemable bigot. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/156 "2019-01-17T23:04:43Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > (emphasis mine) > > This is what many people still don’t get. _ **Homosexuality is not something you can agree or disagree with** _. > > Saying “I don’t believe in homosexuality” is like saying “I don’t believe in being black.” Objecting to gays getting married is no different from objecting to blacks getting married – it’s denying them the same basic personhood that everyone deserves. I’ve always objected to the idea that any desire is “who you are”, even a sexual desire. If I get a rush from stealing, I don’t even need the money, I just get a rush from it, is being a thief just “who I am?” No, I have a desire that I’m giving in to, that doesn’t mean it’s “who I am”. I don’t think proponents of your statement understand just how profound the implications are for Christian adherents. It’s a kill shot. The only way to reconcile the statement with Christian belief is to argue that God creates some people with his thumb holding them down and saying, “Get up or you’re going to hell.” I can probably assume you don’t particularly care what kind of quandry it puts Christians in, but I’d just like to point out that it takes a shot at the reliability of the Bible, and by extension, the faith itself, and will always be met with pushback. At least if they’re serious. There are a lot of desires people have that they object to and turn from. You may want to rage on a driver who cuts you off, and maybe that happens a lot. You fight it, you don’t just say, “I’m a road rager, that’s just who I am.” Sexual desires are no different. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/157 "2019-01-17T23:23:29Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > That’s one view. Another view is that a devout Christian could take to heart the message in the New Testament that _everyone_ is a sinner, and thus, discriminating against gays while ignoring others goes against Matthew 7:1-3: Would a church that refused to officiate a gay wedding run afoul of good Christian behavior? At what point is a Christian allowed to say, “This is sin, and instead of helping you celebrate it, I’m going to refuse to be a part of it”? From a Christian perspective, these people are consecrating their path to destruction. It belies a lack of understanding about Christian faith that the purported correct response is to help them celebrate the consecration. ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/158 "2019-01-17T23:35:29Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > I’ve always objected to the idea that any desire is “who you are”, even a sexual desire. If I get a rush from stealing, I don’t even need the money, I just get a rush from it, is being a thief just “who I am?” No, I have a desire that I’m giving in to, that doesn’t mean it’s “who I am”. > > I don’t think proponents of your statement understand just how profound the implications are for Christian adherents. It’s a kill shot. The only way to reconcile the statement with Christian belief is to argue that God creates some people with his thumb holding them down and saying, “Get up or you’re going to hell.” I can probably assume you don’t particularly care what kind of quandry it puts Christians in, but I’d just like to point out that it takes a shot at the reliability of the Bible, and by extension, the faith itself, and will always be met with pushback. > > At least if they’re serious. > > There are a lot of desires people have that they object to and turn from. You may want to rage on a driver who cuts you off, and maybe that happens a lot. You fight it, you don’t just say, “I’m a road rager, that’s just who I am.” Sexual desires are no different. Yes, sexual desires \*are \*different. Everyone is wired to seek love; some are just wired to seek it from different people. Homosexuality is not just some weird impulse that some people can control and others can’t. Your equating a homosexual with someone who can’t control their impulses to steal or drive dangerously is, frankly, disgusting. But you’re right – I don’t give a fuck about what the implications might be for some “Christian adherents,” especially since I know plenty of devout Christians (and Jews, FTR) who believe God’s love is broader, deeper and more inclusive than a couple of stray lines in the Bible. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/159 "2019-01-17T23:39:48Z")
> [@Dacien](#): > > I\*\*'ve always objected to the idea that any desire is “who you are”, even a sexual desire. If I get a rush from stealing, I don’t even need the money, I just get a rush from it, is being a thief just “who I am?” \*\*No, I have a desire that I’m giving in to, that doesn’t mean it’s “who I am”. > > I don’t think proponents of your statement understand just how profound the implications are for Christian adherents. It’s a kill shot. The only way to reconcile the statement with Christian belief is to argue that God creates some people with his thumb holding them down and saying, “Get up or you’re going to hell.” I can probably assume you don’t particularly care what kind of quandry it puts Christians in, but I’d just like to point out that it takes a shot at the reliability of the Bible, and by extension, the faith itself, and will always be met with pushback. > > At least if they’re serious. > > There are a lot of desires people have that they object to and turn from. You may want to rage on a driver who cuts you off, and maybe that happens a lot. You fight it, you don’t just say, “I’m a road rager, that’s just who I am.” Sexual desires are no different. Being a thief harms others. Being homosexual does not. Frankly, if a baker won’t make a cake for a gay wedding because of their beliefs, then they shouldn’t make a cake for a second wedding, cakes for illegitimate children and the disabled. All of those are sins or abominations before the Lord according to the Bible. ---
**Author:** ![Dacien](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dacien/32/5663_2.png) [@Dacien](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dacien)\ **Post date:** [January 17, 2019, 11:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687/160 "2019-01-17T23:43:05Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > Yes, sexual desires \*are \*different. Everyone is wired to seek love; some are just wired to seek it from different people. Homosexuality is not just some weird impulse that some people can control and others can’t. > > Your equating a homosexual with someone who can’t control their impulses to steal or drive dangerously is, frankly, disgusting. I’m not saying they can’t control it, I’m saying they choose not to. They see no problem with it. And as a freedom-enjoying American, that’s their right. But I do not believe that desires are the same as characteristics determined by DNA. > [@](#): > > But you’re right – I don’t give a fuck about what the implications might be for some “Christian adherents,” especially since I know plenty of devout Christians (and Jews, FTR) who believe God’s love is broader, deeper and more inclusive than a couple of stray lines in the Bible. As long as you avoid the whole “sin” subject, don’t ask why Jesus died, and eschew discussion of repentence, you can get along quite well in the world as a Christian. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-do-you-believe-in-social-progress/826687.md?page=9)