metonymy wrote:To be honest, I resent the implication that a Christian stamp needs to be added to be more "fair", e.g., to make up for or stand in opposition to the stamp that promotes equality for everyone. Please don't let bigots and extremists make you think that Christianity is about hate.
I would like to reiterate my support for more LGBTQA+ stamps - pride flags, and preferred pronoun stamps (including neutral options such as they and hir). We've already made great strides, but let's go all the way and make it clear to our non-heterosexual players that they are welcome c:
I believe Beatus meant "fair" as in everybody being represented, not so there's an "opposition" to the equality stamp. Christianity, and most major religions from what I understand of them, are not about hate; they're supposed to teach the opposite. There are bigots and extremists in everything, but that's not what religion is about, and that's not what I think Beatus meant to imply.
I like that the "human rights" stamp is more or less neutral. Yes, it has a rainbow, but instead of saying something like "I support gay rights," it's designed to cover everything and can be interpreted however you want. I think anything more specific would not be a good idea, since it's bound to cause arguments from the opposition either way.
And, if you want my "two cents" about that stamp, I think the fact that we immediately connect rainbows and equality statements with homosexuality and consider the stamp limited to LGBT rights shows we still have a long way to go. "I support human rights and equality for everything" seems to translate to "I support gay rights" for some people, and while that's part of what the stamp means, the statement is supposed to represent the broader picture: equality for
all, meaning as much race equality, gender equality, age equality, etc. as LGBT equality. By associating it specifically with homosexuality, whether "good" or "bad," we can end up losing a lot of what the stamp is supposed to mean.