I resent the title of this post. Supporters of traditional marriage aren’t knuckle dragging Neanderthals who need to be “educated”. We’re quite intelligent, thank you very much. We oppose gay marriage for valid moral, religious, cultural, and/or philosophical reasons. We’re not stupid, narrow-minded haters. If you have rational arguments for gay marriage state them but don’t try to “educate” us, please.
Comment by Seane-Anna — June 2, 2009 @ 9:24 pm - June 2, 2009
Seanne-Anna, point well taken.
Comment by GayPatriotWest — June 2, 2009 @ 9:34 pm - June 2, 2009
Intelligent people can still be wrong. GPW is simply saying that intelligent people such as yourself need to know all the facts and the benefits that gay marriage would bring to the institution you obviously hold dear. He hopes its possible to convince you otherwise. However, I think that you probably will never be convinced otherwise. Hopefully eventually the courts will force it, so you can be convinced by the loving examples of gay spouses.
Comment by gillie — June 2, 2009 @ 10:00 pm - June 2, 2009
You’re correct. Even the definition above implies you don’t understand the arguments of gay marriage supporters. while acceptance implies correctness. I think you and most supporters of traditional marriage understand the arguments, you just reject them as false. I reject most of them as false. The better word is persuade.
Comment by American Elephant — June 2, 2009 @ 10:40 pm - June 2, 2009
Gillie, why don’t YOU “educate” me on the benefits allowing gay marriage will supposedly bring to an institution that has successfully existed for millenia without it. That’s not a rhetorical question. I want to know.
I don’t believe, though, that gay marriage supporters give a you-know-what about benefitting marriage. Indeed, that argument contradicts another one I often hear from gays, namely, that gay marriage should be allowed because it WON’T effect heterosexual marriage. So which is it? How can gay marriage benefit marriage AND have no effect on heterosexual marriage at the same time? Sounds a little Orwellian to me. And no, seeing “loving gay spouses” won’t change my mind on gay marriage any more than seeing a “loving” incestuous couple, like that Australian father-daughter duo was supposed to be, would change my mind about incest. Nice try, though.
Please, can’t we just be honest about what legalizing gay marriage is really all about? It’s NOT about equality. It’s about destroying the Biblical moral worldview on which America, as a part of Western civilization, was based. Liberals have been maliciously undermining that value system for at least a generation. Getting an official stamp of approval on homosexuality will be a decisive victory for the Left in its war on Judeo-Christian morality. That’s what legalizing gay marriage is really about. Why don’t you gay marriage supporters just admit it?!
Comment by Seane-Anna — June 2, 2009 @ 10:49 pm - June 2, 2009
Hopefully eventually the courts will force it, so you can be convinced by the loving examples of gay spouses
Translation: Up with tyranny! Liberalism uber alles! And if you are not convinced after it is forced on you, then off to the re-education camps you go! How dare you claim heterosexuality is different than homosexuality!
Comment by American Elephant — June 2, 2009 @ 10:49 pm - June 2, 2009
“Liberalism uber alles!” is pretty much what this issue is coming down to, American Elephant. You nailed it.
Comment by Seane-Anna — June 2, 2009 @ 10:57 pm - June 2, 2009
Seane-Anna, I wish my recent marriage had become possible through legislative action rather than judicial fiat. But the change in the law means my husband and I can now unquestionably visit and make decisions for each other at the hospital, have automatic access to a variety of state services if we choose to use them, we can consolidate our health insurance wiwithout undue burden, we gain inheritance rights that some of my disapproving relatives won’t be able to interfere with, we know that words we share can never be used against us in a court of law and countless other legal benefits bestowed on couples in the civil contract named after the religious tradition called marriage.
None of that undercuts my faith in God. I can’t see how it threatens anyone else’s ability to exercise their faith, much less the underpinnings of our culture and society.
Comment by Brezhnev — June 2, 2009 @ 11:29 pm - June 2, 2009
I can’t see how it threatens anyone else’s ability to exercise their faith
I am glad you brought this up. I am happy to tell you how.
On of the many ways Catholics exercise their faith is by adopting needy orphaned children out to married couples who will give the children a good home and a better life. This charitable work is good for childen and good for society.
Not only do they believe that homosexuality is sinful, but their religion, and biology, also instructs them that a mother and a father is ideal.
The state of Massachusetts told the Catholic church that if they wanted to continue their adoption services they must also adopt children to same sex couples, in violation of their religious beliefs. So Catholics in Massachusetts no longer provide any adoption service for anyone. This obviously harms both their freedom of religious expression, their freedom of association but it harms society and the children who will not be adopted out as a result.
Keep in mind there are other adoption agencies in MA that already adopt to same sex couples.
Many other court cases have forced religious people and organizations to associate themselves with same sex “marriages” in a number of ways.
It astonishes me that in a country where religious expression is the primary freedom protected by the constitution, and where same sex marriage is only recognized by statute or judicial fiat in a handful of places, that statutory protections are allowed to trump constitutional protections. Nevertheless that is what is happening. And people who object to same sex marriage on religious grounds are being forced by the government to recognize and associate with them against their will.
And once established, gay activists will use gay marriage to continue their attack on the freedoms of religious exercise, speech and association as they have already done everywhere gay marriage is recognized.
You see, you may be fine with other peoples religious freedom, but a large activist segment of the “gay community” is not. They want to use government to stop people who believe homosexuality is sinful from preaching it, teaching it, saying it or exercising that belief in any way shape or form. And there are liberal activists on the bench and liberals in office who are more than happy to help.
much less the underpinnings of our culture and society.
Aside from the further destruction of the freedoms of religious exercise, speech and association, what threatens the underpinnings of our culture and society is the further erosion of the connection between marriage and the nuclear family. It is not the fault of gay marriage, but gay marriage is only able to even be considered because a large number of Americans either forgot, or never knew that the importance of marriage to society is in the structure it establishes for reproduction and child rearing.
But you cannot have an institution that is about encouraging reproduction and rearing of children by their biological parents when you say the institution must recognize no difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality.
indeed, marriage cant be about kids at all if same sex couples are allowed to marry, because homosexuality cannot create children, only heterosexuality can.
So it must become just another entitlement for adults.
Anyone who thinks that separating having children from marriage is not devastating to society, need look no further than those communities where they already have. Where the out of wedlock birth rate is over 70%. Where children are FAR more likely to drop out of school, commit crime, do drugs, be illiterate, be poor, have health problems, die earlier and any other social ill you want to name.
Mothers and fathers matter. Children matter. And marriage matters to the well being of society AND kids.
Gay marriage is just a symptom of the liberalization of marriage that has turned it from an institution that serves an important purpose, to an institution that is a meaningless entitlement. Doing so harms society.
Comment by American Elephant — June 3, 2009 @ 2:49 am - June 3, 2009
Wednesday, June 03, 2009
In the thread following the GayPatriot post "Gay Marriage Activists Who Prefer Intimidation to Education":