A Quandary

It is sad, sobering, cold-hard fact that there are people in this world who follow blindly this thing called religion.
I recognize that people get through life better with a moral structure, a framework that allows them to follow their straight-and-narrow path to their version of the "there-after." I get that it helps them find peace of mind and puts them in commune with others so they can feel less alone in this world. For this reason, I recognize their need, acknowledge the necessity, and try my hardest to accept it.
But, more aptly put, I think many of them are following a straight-only, narrow-minded path to their "there-after." In the name of their "God," they follow intrinsically elitist thought, thinking themselves better than others because they are can justify themselves with this lemming-logic called religion.

To provide a specific example, I have a relative, who shared a meme espousing the belief that Marriage is between one man, one woman. She claimed that this message was "God-Approved," and ignored the fact that the meme she shared was the propaganda of a hate group focused on couching hate in religious terms to further their hateful agenda.
I called this relative out on this. She responded with an assertion that she would not apologize for what she believed in and "was not a member of" the hate group and "didn't know it was a hate group," as if that were any excuse. AND, she left the meme posted. No remorse, no apology for having offended her own family member(s), and was defiant in her defense of her belief, stating she had no intention to offend anyone when she posted it.
I told her she had lost respect in my eyes, asked for the removal of the meme, and tried to debug her logic. Eventually, she relented, but only sort of. She removed the meme, but the retraction came with a caveat: she posted this in its stead:

"I removed a post that I shared today because I was told that it comes from a hurtful source and I believe in keeping peace. :-) As far as what the post said, however, I still believe that the definition of marriage is a lifelong union between a man and a woman and nothing more."

I cannot call this a victory. I may have prevented the circulation of hate-driven meme, but I did not change a heart. I have no superpowers here, I am a mere mortal, and one that falls directly outside the fence of her elitist thought.
Is it her fault that her "religion" calls for the systematic segregation of those with a broader capacity to love?  Is it her fault that her "religion" is based on Old Testament scripture and written works by men lead astray from Jesus' teachings?
Is it her fault that hate permeates this world in the guise of love?

YES.

She, and all others who have been taught this way of thinking, should apply critical-thinking skills and the actual teachings of Jesus to examine more carefully the messages in and behind the religion, the memes, the faith, that she wears on her sleeve. She should not accept blindly that which she does not truly understand, she should know the sources and motivations behind the thing(s) she repeats. She should be open to dialogue that challenges her to think, that expands her knowledge, that broadens her world.
And, she should, at the very least, be sensitive to the people in her family that she claims to love - apparently with qualification.

As for me, I question why I care. Who is she to me, other than a relative of the family? I assert that the true definition of family is those that act like it. Do true family members say things like "I love you, but I don't agree with your lifestyle," as if being gay was MY choice? Do true family members say "I don't think you are equal to me, and therefore I oppose your rights to live your life? Do true family members oppose my right to live a happy, healthy life in which I cause no harm to others?

People such as these really have no place in my life. And yet, how can I change their hearts if they are not? It is a quandary I must ponder...

Simple Machines.

How can there still be people in my life who claim they love me and care about me and YET still qualify their "love" by saying crap like "I don't agree with your lifestyle," or call being gay a "choice?" WTF?
The truth is, any argument or retort I might have to offer these people tends to be a waste because their minds don't ever want to be changed, they're almighty in their assertion that they are right, and I, therefore, must be wrong. 

I suppose I'm just as guilty of that logic. 

Point me, if you will, or if you can, to any credible evidence that proves I ever had any choice in being gay. 
And don't quote me any lemming bible - that is NOT evidence. 
Because all evidence I have is to the contrary.
I know many folks who live a falsehood, by hiding their true selves in an unsatisfactory marriage or lonely bachelorhood - wishing, of course, to avoid the "consequences" of being "out." They forget that they are involving innocents in their deceptions - spouses, children, family and friends.
Had I made that "choice," I'm sure I would have committed suicide many years ago, or at the very least, have been victim to severe depression or other mental disorder.
My "lifestyle" is NOT about sex, or lust, or debauchery.
It's about identity, and about having the capacity to love a PERSON, and gender has little to do with it.
And don't tell me "don't knock it until you try it," because not only have I tried it (relationships with women), but I challenge you to find a vehemently straight person who felt the need to "try it" with a same-gendered partner before they "knew" they were straight. They KNOW they're straight, same as I know I'm gay.
And I refuse to live a lie, especially not to satiate religious, societal or moral expectations of a misled and misinformed group of people or individual.
So, I am forced to move beyond such arguments with people who might never be convinced by logic. Instead, I'm forced to examine the importance of my relationships with such people: Just how important is "family?" My assertion is that "family" is defined by people who actually ACT LIKE IT, and most times has absolutely NOTHING to do with blood ties. And in that sense, family is very important to me. 
My assertion is that love of a person is unconditional, but the degree in which I need that person involved in my life is directly related to my comfort level with that person. Obviously, if they're willing to try, so am I, and in doing so, I might gently change their minds through example - through them seeing that my relationship has richness, fulfillment, quality - and genuine love. They may be able to see that whatever prejudice or preconceived notion they may have about a gay person is changed by their willingness to care, to be involved, to be open-minded.
With such open-minded or open-hearted people, it is easy to see a clear path for association, for friendship, for quality relations.
But just how (and why) do I need a person in my life who is closed in mind and heart? Shall I just dismiss them, count them out, edit them out of my life? Should they be deleted (in modern terms) from my Facebook, my twitter, my newsfeed? Should I recognize that they are unchangeable, immovable, hopeless - in terms of their capacity for unconditional love?
One thing I know for sure: I'm NOT editing my life for their personal comfort - NOR should they. Certainly they are entitled to their opinion, and I defend their right to do so, just as surely as I defend my own right. But i don't have to compromise my integrity, my happiness or my identity.
But I have to ask, if that is their mindset - if their hearts are truly closed, why do they insist on calling me "family?" Are they relying too heavily on a deep-rooted "traditional" definition of the word?
If "family" is so important to them, why does it seem to come with conditions (I love you but I don't agree with your lifestyle...), with prerequisites (we don't talk about, or just simply ignore, the "gay" thing)?
I'm left with the only logical conclusion - and that is simply that they're leaving a door open for dialogue, whether it be locked, barred, bolted, welded or otherwise - the door is still there, and I should not give up hope. If the door wasn't there, why do they bother? Why not just simply be completely uninvolved? Why include me in their life at all?
So with that in consideration, I have to study intent. Perhaps the phrasing, the word choice, is a an accidental offense, one that comes from a lack of familiarity or association with real-live-gay-people. Perhaps they simply do not know they are being offensive.
So, I'll just continue to be myself. They can continue to be themselves. Perhaps by continued association, we will both learn the intent of the other, and it won't be so bad as it was in my head. There are keys to locks, pry bars for bolts,  the inclined plane was  invented for exactly this purpose. The gentle wedge shall prevail. 
And if it doesn't, time will solve it, eventually - TIME - the simplest machine of them all.

Chick-Fil-A

While I personally will not support this business, I respect and support their right to run their business as they see fit. There is a term bandied about, that word, "christian," that implies love and compassion, and yet daily I see it abused in reference to people who do not exemplify it. Chick-Fil-A and its leaders hardly exemplify the word, when they choose to financially back hate groups that seek to demonize people like me. So Chick-Fil-A will not get my business, and I despise their brand of "christian," but I respect their right to operate their business and attract their own brand of so-called "christians."
There has been recent Facebook chatter about a "National Same Sex Kiss Day at Chick Fil A." Initially, I thought, "hell yeah, we should do that!" But after some thought and conversation with my husband, I find myself worried that the wisdom of this "National Same Sex Kiss Day at Chick Fil A" is flawed.
Several scenarios come to mind. A hot topic like this draws media - and the media cameras catch the horrified look of a poor mother sitting in the restaurant with her young children as gays kiss and she tries desperately to shield those kids eyes from it. The media interviews her on her reactions. Then the right-wingers and hate-filled-christians exploit the interview into soundbites and propaganda.
Or, god forbid, a protective father decides to defend his beliefs and his children from such sights as gays kissing by a vicious attack on those gays in that Chick-Fil-A, and a hate crime ensues.
My husband said, "I don't like the idea of using an expression of love to shock people." My husband is a smart man. We don't need to flaunt it, we don't need to sensationalize it. 
What we need is a national-scale boycott of the business, in which no gay, lesbian or gay/lesbian friendly individual or group does business with Chick-Fil-A. What we need is for corporate partners currently doing business with Chick-Fil-A to sever that partnership, like "The Muppets" have done. 
Whether or not Chick-Fil-A feels the impact of said boycott depends on the scale of that boycott - but our dollars could not be better not-spent. Or perhaps, invested instead in supporting a business that has positive policies regarding gays and lesbians. What more powerful statement could we as a community make than to build up and support a business that gives back to our community?
We can be vocal about our distaste with the business practices of Chick-Fil-A, and perhaps make a difference with regards to their evolution. But lets not forget to support the businesses that DO give their support to our community - and focus our energies (and money) there.