How funny; Townhall.com just sent me an utterly hysterical email this morning about what the “radical homosexuals” are up to. Does Salem know about the scaremongering Townhall is engaging in, in order to raise funds? If it does, is it also aware that Hot Air is chock-full of “homosexual” sympathizers? Townhall:
The Homosexual Lobby played a major role in electing Obama and the majorities he enjoys in both houses of Congress.
I can only begin to imagine all the damage the Radical Homosexuals will do with their allies controlling the House of Representatives, the Senate and the White House. . . .
Backed by Hollywood celebrities, the media and millions of your tax dollars, the Radical Homosexuals have many Congressmen quivering with fear — and they have a Radical Homosexual-friendly majority in control of Congress.
Don’t I wish.
I mean, I get that any publishing company tries to get similar publications to target slightly different markets—but I hadn’t realized they could work at cross-purposes to this degree.
Paul Revere just rode down my street; he called up to my condo balcony, “the homosexuals are coming! The homosexuals are coming!”
More sanely, Bride of Rove writes about Cynthia Yockey’s quest to get conservatives on-board with what she calls “marriage equality,” which means that the phrasing used for state-blessed gay unions must eventually be the same as for straight unions. That sounds right to me: if gays have “civil unions,” then that should be the legal term for straight marriages, as well. Though I’m coming more and more to the position that all the states should do is proclaim us life partners, and it’s up to our churches, familes and communities to call us husbands and wives. BoR:
Cynthia Yockey is working on “Making the conservative case for lesbian and gay equality“. I actually have to think about that one for a minute because the word “equality” simply doesn’t fit with the conservative view of the human condition. We are born with equal potential, but not into equal circumstances. The conservative goal as I understand it is, to clear the way for the individual to make of their life, whatever they wish through their own efforts or lack there-of. Am I wrong or off in that somehow? The government doesn’t confer equality upon us by fiat. It can’t. I have never understood the support of – seemingly – all conservatives for the biblical definition of marriage – just as an example. If two people want to get married and have or adopt kids the government should not be limiting them in that freedom.
Cynthia may never win over the intransigent social conservatives.
Sounds like she won’t get the folks at Townhall!
The government should not force churches to perfrom the ceremony if it is against their religion, but a religious interpretation, just because it is held by a majority, should not dictate the lives of every American. Who the hell even decided that the majority could vote on the rights of individuals? It’s not a damned crime to get married. Well it was a crime when Angelina stole Brad from Jenn, but that’s just my opinion. I didn’t get to vote that one down and we should not be allowed to vote gay marriage up or down. It’s ridiculous.
If Cynthia wants to open those doors, facts are not going to win her case. She will have to appeal to their emotions and sense of community. Here’s where that’s failing currently. So many gay and lesbians in the public eye are hard left liberal in their political views that they are associated with everything conservatives see as damaging to the future of this nation. By simply being who she is she is breaking new ground in perception and making the case for the conservative view that everyone is an individual and should be taken as such and that we are all working to keep this country free for that strength to flourish. We should get out of the business of social engineering. That’s progressive terretory and dangerous ground.
I am looking forward to her fact finding mission, however.
(Boldface is mine.) The “facts” referred to herein are from this Spadilio post, but I’m not sure that he was really talking about facts qua facts. I think he meant “splishy splashy headliney things.”
That’s it. Cynthia calls me every month or so, and when we discuss gay marriage, she usually remarks, “now is good” in a way that makes me laugh for its straightforwardness. It won’t be “now,” but it will be soon, and with any luck it will be driven by individual states, rather than the Feds. All of us, with the possible exception of Dennis Prager and his disciples, will be better off for it.
; ?>/images/user.png)
; ?>/images/email.png)
; ?>/images/feed.png)
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
“The government should not force churches to perfrom the ceremony if it is against their religion, but a religious interpretation, just because it is held by a majority, should not dictate the lives of every American. Who the hell even decided that the majority could vote on the rights of individuals? It’s not a damned crime to get married.”
China doesn’t allow gays to get married. Nor does Cuba. No religious definition in either place. In fact, only a handful of countries do allow it, not just us backward countries with laws derived from Juseo-Christian traditions. Funny that is never mentioned by pro-gay marriage advocates. And, where it is allowed, it has been for the most part forced on the nation by judges ruling against the will of the people.
China and Cuba are now our role models? Heaven help us!
I think that the government should get out of the marriage business. No special rights for married. Equal protection of the laws means equal. Anyone can be “married” and have exactly the same duties and responsibilities under the law as they did before they were married.
Homosexual marriage is a subsidy to lawyers, which we don’t need.
The only reason that I do not support “gay marriage” is that it will lead directly to lawsuits against churches and other legal assaults on religion. I’m all for a civil arrangement for heterosexuals, let’s do that, everyone has the same civil rights, but it doesn’t encroach on or open the door for encroachment on religion. This will leave our churches free to marry according to their doctrine and teachings.
Joy, dear, thank you for this post.
I’m saving my facts for my book. The new goal is not “marriage equality,” but full-on, total equality — no more of this piecemeal nonsense where we fight for every scrap and crumb.
Equality for lesbians and gays now — now is good — now works for me.
The tomatoes are in and I’m getting back to blogging, but most of this weekend will be spent making my father’s life a joy while I still can.