(my introductory diary)
History is fraught with condemnation of homosexuality as societies have tried to dictate to homosexual people how they should live their lives. ("And aren't they lucky we let them live at all!!") I believe much of that is directly due to the belief of many that the mere fact that we exist will bring wrath down upon the heads of society as a whole.
I think that belief is what fuels the current push-back in many states concerning so-called "religious freedom/rights." If society itself is unable to "hold back 'the gay'," fundamentalists have decided it is up to individuals to try to do so. In this way, those leaders of anti-gay organizations instill real and direct fear in their followers, holding each of them personally responsible for the potential (eventual) destruction of the Earth, which they all know is coming any day now, unless that "power over wrath" can be convinced that at least "some good people" still exist.
We can fight these individuals in court, and we can (eventually) win, but perhaps civil communication between individuals can achieve even better, more long-lasting goals. (And, at this point, even achieving civil communication between us and some of those who oppose us is a lofty goal in itself.)
Details after the orange Curly-Q.
An Excessively Abbreviated History of Gay People and the Societies in Which We Live:
"Society" to gay people over time, and the gay community's responses:
You cannot exist!
But we can and do.
You cannot have sex!
But we can and do.
You cannot be visible!
But we can and are.
You cannot have contact with children!
But we can and do.
You cannot hold positions of responsibility for children, especially parenthood!
But we can and do.
You cannot marry each other!
But we can and do.
Now some in society say --
You cannot purchase our products/services for your wedding!
WHAT? (Here we go again…)
(Full disclosure: I am a photographer. While I have never sold my photography skills as a business venture, I have taken photographs of friends' events, including one wedding years ago. When the couple saw the photographs afterward, they were so happy with them that the bride was in tears as she thanked me. And, altho I no longer practice any religion, I was raised Catholic and have family members who align themselves with various religions. And I'm gay.)
For most of the products and services required for more than just a small, private wedding, this should be a no-brainer. Floral arrangements, cakes, and catered food seem, to me, to be pretty generic. While I agree that all involve an art form in some sense, they are not intrinsically art, and if they end up being "adequate" as opposed to "spectacular," would it be the worst thing in the world? (Those who think these statements are completely off-base, please let me know in your comments.)
When it comes to photographs, however, the difference between "adequate" and "spectacular" is huge.
So, a question: If the owner of a photography company was unable to find a photographer on staff that would happily take pictures at the wedding, and that person said the following to the gay couple gently and with sincerity, what would the gay community's response be? (I mean, besides the obvious dissemination of the information and maybe even an organized boycott...)
Owner: "I understand and support your legal right to marry, but the concept of it violates my religious beliefs about your relationship. I have spoken with every photographer I employ, and all of them feel the same way I do. I do not consider taking pictures at a wedding to be simply the acts of positioning people and pressing the shutter release on the camera. When I photograph a wedding, in my heart I am also celebrating the union of those two people. Because of my beliefs, I know my heart would not be in it at your wedding. I fear that would result not only in merely adequate photographs of what I know will be one of the happiest days of your life, but also in it being one of the most miserable days of mine. I will photograph your wedding if you insist, but I would prefer not to."
OTOH, were an employee photographer to hold a different set of religious beliefs, simply assigning that person for the event could solve everything.