Nobody here has intruded on anyone's privacy. We're on a public forum where people are expressing their views. If someone doesn't want to hear anyone else's opinions, he/she could just not tap the comment button. Problem solved.
Christians believe that sharing their beliefs is a core part of their religion. There is really no such thing as a Christian who keeps his religion to himself, because part of being a Christian is reaching out to others. In fact, that's really what the religion is all about. There are many reasons why it's simply not right to demand that they keep their mouth shut. I've shared several of those reasons here, and nobody has even attempted a response to any of them. And you completely dodged my question.
I mean, you're just saying the same thing over and over again, so we're obviously not getting anywhere. I guess you're right, we are to far apart. I'm just sad that I'm the only one here who thinks building a bridge would be a good idea. Can't say I didn't try.

Nobody is running into gay couples' bedroom with a gun forcing them to stay away from each other. That would be disrespectful. It's not disrespectful to disagree with someone's choices, and it's definitely not disrespectful to offer advice. Obviously there is disrespect in many of the anti-gay members of our culture, but simply being opposed to something like gay marriage is not inherently disrespectful.
Tell me something: All those commercials you see on TV about quitting smoking -- are those disrespectful? Yes or no, and why?
Elsewhere I've said that only a fool takes offense where offense is not intended. I stand by that. It applies here. If someone doesn't mean any disrespect by what they're doing, then they are not being disrespectful. End of story. Person B does not get to decide whether Person A is being respectful or not. That doesn't make any sense at all. But you're doing it anyway, as if you know everything about Person A's heart, mind, and perspective.

Being human entitles you to respect, saviourself. That's where we seem to disagree. I believe that everyone deserves respect and consideration, not just the people who see things the way I do.
The propaganda is statements like "being against gay marriage is like criticizing someone for eating a donut because you're on a diet", or "the Bible also says your wife can get beaten for wearing two different kinds of fabrics at the dinner table, and you could sell your daughters into slavery and it was acceptable" or "Are these haters just jealous because they love each other in a way that those judging have never felt?" Those arguments are dishonest and spiteful. Yes, the other side does it too. But that's no excuse.

There's a problem with your suggestion... I don't think/believe they'll burn in hell. :P
You guys are really good at putting words in my mouth. I wasn't even the one that brought up my disagreement with homosexual behavior or any of the reasons for it. I came here talking about something else -- about simply having respect for each other and trying to end the propaganda war. Then saviourself came along and re-drew the battle lines, which is exactly what I was advocating against. Unfortunately I fell for it and fought back, which I'll admit was a mistake.

I haven't said anything hateful. Have I? "Love" doesn't mean "tolerate everything they do and pretend the world is all rainbows and lollipops." Love means concern. Love means helping. Love means reaching out and doing what's best for them, even if it is difficult, or even if it stings a little. Jesus never tolerated wickedness for a minute. He loved the sinner, but always hated the sin. That's pretty clear if you actually read the New Testament.
This is a waste of time, so let me just finish with this: Do you guys really think I would be here making these comments just because I want to spite you? How on earth would that make any sense? I'm here because I believe in something that I know works, and I am confident that I have found something that all of you would benefit from. I try to share it with you because, as I explained above, I believe we're all in this together, and I want to do my part to help make the world a better place. If you hate me for that, I am sorry.
Peace out.

The fact that I received the same number of downvotes on my second comment as on my first intrigues me. Certainly I said nothing even remotely offensive in the second one, but it was downvoted just the same, just because of who it was coming from. That's disappointing.
You talk about a world where everyone minds their own business only and everyone just walks around in little personal bubbles as if such a world would be a good thing. What people like me believe is that we're all in this together, and we've gotta help each other out. Keeping opinions entirely to yourself is nothing short of selfish. We all have experiences, and we all have things to offer and to learn from each other. That's why it would be foolish, even fatal to simply "mind your own business." Humanity will not survive that way. So I won't do it.

You guys are missing the point. It's not about judging people, it's about helping them. A Christian does not judge any person. But a Christian does judge actions, attitudes, and behaviors. One of the problems here is that when someone like me says "I disagree with homosexual behavior", you guys turn on victim mode and act like you're being attacked. You're not. Someone's just trying to help. But you insist on making them the bad guy, because it's a lot easier to disregard them if you tell yourselves that they are evil or stupid. That's what I'm talking about. That's the kind of fallacious thought that is making these issues so hostile.
If you guys don't want this to be a war, don't simply insist that the other side be the first to offer the truce. 'Cuz you know what? They're waiting for you too. You take responsibility for the situation, and you be the first one to put your sword down. That's all I'm suggesting.
And you downvote me because I ask something hard of you.

Also, keep in mind that not everyone who opposes homosexual behaviors is going to want to stone you. Unfortunately the loudest mouths get the most attention, but they don't accurately represent the rest of us.

No it's not. Let me just say this to everyone here: I'm just as disgusted by hate and violence and discrimination as you are, but you guys are making no effort whatsoever to understand where people who oppose homosexual behavior are coming from. You want them to understand and accept your position, but you are content simply writing them off as idiots that don't deserve any kind of basic human respect.
The hypocrisy I'm seeing in this comment feed is a huge turnoff. If you want people to respect you, start by being the bigger person and respecting them first. You'd be surprised how much of a difference that can make.

P.S. It's in the New Testament too. So... Yeah. That's all.

I'll take that world over the one we're getting into now.

Mulan 2, to be precise.

But it could have been as little as 40 to 150 days according to what I recall from the Old Testament. Maybe I'm missing something...?

I know that it is, I'm just saying it shouldn't be.
Otherwise you're just saying the same thing over, and I don't see how that has anything to do with anything I said, and I kinda wonder if you even read my response.
But I don't like getting into debates on FS -- it's not a good forum for that. I've said what was on my mind, and I'll just leave it at that.

Let me just point out that that wasn't an attack on gay marriage, because I promise you, no animals do gay marriage.
Sure, the fact that animals do something doesn't inherently make it bad. But it sure as heck doesn't make it inherently good either. I think both arguments fail for the same reasons. Animals simply don't have the same concepts of morality that we do, so I vote we just leave them out of it. Citing animal behavior as a reference in a moral issue is like asking a tree for dating advice. It has no concept of that, so let's not pretend it does.

Yeah. They say eating your children is wrong too. And rape. And all sorts of other fun stuff.
The animals clearly have it all figured out, why shouldn't we be more like them?

If they were polar opposites, religion would be about intentionally ignoring or intentionally believing the opposite of whatever science discovers. That's not what religion is about. Sure it happens sometimes, but that's not at all what religion's purpose is -- and people who do that are doing it to their own condemnation. Science and religion are more alike than they are different. They are both about discovering truth. They are both about taking personal responsibility for your knowledge of truth (as opposed to believing it just because someone said so). And, really, they are both about testing and improving that knowledge of truth on a constant basis. The only difference there is that science measures with inches, degrees, and other numerical quantities while religion measures with the heart. They hardly sound like polar opposites.

Oxford scientist Roger Penrose has written convincingly that whatever is missing from our understanding of fundamental physics is also missing from our understanding of consciousness. I don't know if he had any theories about what that thing is, but I think religious principles can fill that gap quite nicely.

Bananas are perfectly shaped for the human hand? Srsly? That's a bit of a stretch.
Avocados, on the other hand... there's no way that was a coincidence.
(Yes, I am joking, in case anyone was worried)

Let me just finish with this: One of the given problems with using metaphors at all is that they can be more easily misunderstood. By their nature, a metaphor places much of the responsibility of understanding on the listener, which clashes with our Western culture, but is also the reason metaphors can be so effective. But metaphors can fail when the listener attaches the wrong meaning and intent to the metaphor. I believe that's what is happening here -- there's a significant gap between the message the teacher is trying to convey and the message you guys are taking away. I don't like these metaphors for that reason (that they are weak enough to be easily misunderstood). But I stand by my belief that the intended message is totally valid and commendable.