Thats the most sense ive heard of how this might be taken. Warren will obviously not get it because he just wants to spread ‘gods message’ of the golden rule, instead of the secular golden rule(DoS). Pretty much ignoring that not all christians take ‘gods message’ of the golden rule the same way(like the above quote implies). Or who knows, maybe what Priya Linn says actually demonstrated what warren actually thinks(but does not say).

1) you are escalating a day of silence into another event entirely.

2) It isn’t about what some christian kids may or may not think about someone else’s so-called sins, their rights to religious or self expression, or anything. It is about gay kids and their allies protesting how gay kids are treated.

3) The criticism leveled at you comes from this basis: i’m sure you don’t want your buddies in the religious right, anti-gay industry seeing you as any kind of a sympathiser to the dreaded HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA ™, however sympathgic you might actually be, which I am not sure i believe. Your golden-rule day looks like an attempt to co-opt them and the issue.

I think it’s simply a matter of mistrust. Just as some conservatives don’t believe gay people when they say that they aren’t trying to subvert and overthrow marriage, some gays don’t believe you when you say you aren’t trying to subvert and overthrow the Day of Silence.

I hope that with time trust can grow.

If that really is the case, then why don’t you just support the “Day of Silence?”

To me is seems simple. What am I missing?

I do not want my kids to be afraid to go to school and I do not want gay kids to be afraid to go to school. I do not want my kids to be beaten up because of some characteristic (or for any reason) and I do not want gay kids to be beaten up.

To me it seems simple. What am I missing?

Who was exaggerating? Not me.

AWWW… i guess its from my side of the world(specifically, family), where, if you DO NOT see an analogy… your just as sick as them.
Again… I cannot treat immorality/wrong/evil as if it wasnt… thus, the outcoem of applying the GOlden Rule WILL NOT be the one gay, pro-gays or accepting christians want.

“I’d want to see them tried and convicted under the legal system. I certainly wouldn’t use it as an excuse to beat the crap out of them when they’re defenseless. I’m sure some would, but I wouldn’t call that righteous behavior.” No, that IS NOT the way one would treat a wrong. Rather, legally prosecuting it. BUT, when the wrong is legal, although i agree that beating the crap is exagerated… it is only exaggerated for a first offense, this of course would be relative). Jamaicans come to mind.
Lol.. if i told you i was a bi-gay you woldnt believe me… When they said ‘struggle’, i thought it woudl be exponentially less condemning(but i wouldnt have it any other way).

The argument is easily defeated with its corollary – ask the homophobe “would you accept being beaten or killed for being heterosexual, if it was by someone who believed that heterosexuality was sin?”

Be honest – the answer would always be no.

Strawman arguments are bad form when homophobes use ‘em, and just as bad when anyone else uses them.

On another point:

“At some point, the argument that protecting gay kids from harassment amounts to harassing the fundamentalist kids and denying them Their religious freedom needs to be addressed head-on. You just can’t finesse it.”

The answer is straightforward and direct. Because homophobes have defined their opposition to the existence of homosexuals as a religious belief, though the idea ‘homosexuality is sin’ – its corollary ‘homosexuality is not sin’ is also a religious belief and is as entitled to protection as every other religious belief. Since homophobes have a long-standing, well-documented history of complaining about instantiation of ‘homosexuality is not sin’ in the public arena, they have sacrificed their right to articulate ‘homosexuality is sin’ in the public arena.