Gay terrorists

I don’t know how I am on this kick, but more on same-sex marriages. First go read Dennis Prager’s amazingly silly column: Dennis Prager: San Francisco and Islamists: Fighting the same enemy. Pay special attention to the portions that begins “Let us understand this redefinition as clearly as possible:”

With same-sex marriage, our society declares by law that mothers are unnecessary, since two men are equally ideal as mothers and as the creators of a family; and that fathers are unnecessary, since two women are equally ideal as parents and as the creators of a family.

With same-sex marriage, our society declares that there is nothing special or even necessarily desirable about a man and a woman bonding. What is sacred to the proponents of same-sex marriage is the number of people marrying (two, for the time being), not that a man and woman bond.

With same-sex marriage, when taught in school about sex, marriage and family, children will have to be taught that male-male and female-female sex, love and marriage are identical to male-female sex, love and marriage. And when asked, “Who do you think you will marry when you grow up?” thanks to the ubiquitous images of media, far more children will consider members of the same sex.

With same-sex marriage, no adoption agency will ever be able to prefer a married man and woman as prospective parents. Aside from the tragedy of denying untold numbers of children a mother and a father, this will lead to a drastic diminution in women placing children for adoption, since most of these women will prefer something that will then be illegal — that agencies place her child with a man and woman, not with two men or two women.

With same-sex marriage, any media — films, advertisements, greeting cards — that only depict married couples as a woman and a man will be considered discriminatory and probably be sued.

With same-sex marriage, those religious groups that only marry men and women will be deemed beyond the pale, marginalized and ostracized.

There have been many Christian countries, and they are no longer. They have been replaced by secular countries, and they are weakening. Only American civilization remains strong, and it does so because of its unique amalgam of values rooted in Judeo-Christian morality.

This civilization is now fighting for its life — as much here as abroad. Join the fight, or it will be gone as fast as you can say “Democrat.”

This is actually a politically acceptable (perhaps even majority) opinion in this country. Yet, presto, if I change a few words:

With mixed-race marriage, our society declares by law that sharing the race of your parents is unnecessary, since having a mother or father who is of a different race is permitted and encouraged.

With mixed-race marriage, our society declares that there is nothing special or even necessarily desirable about two people of the same race bonding. What is sacred to the proponents of mixed-race marriage is the number of people marrying (two, for the time being), not that two people of the same race bond.

With mixed-race marriage, when taught in school about sex, marriage and family, children will have to be taught that black-white, brown-yellow sex, love and marriage are identical to white-white sex, love and marriage. And when asked, “Who do you think you will marry when you grow up?” thanks to the ubiquitous images of media, far more children will consider members of other races.

With mixed-race marriage, no adoption agency will ever be able to prefer a purely white (or other race) couple as prospective parents. Aside from the tragedy of denying untold numbers of children parents of their own race, this will lead to a drastic diminution in women placing children for adoption, since most of these women will prefer something that will then be illegal — that agencies place her child with a family of the same race, not with some impure mix of parents.

With mixed-race marriage, any media — films, advertisements, greeting cards — that only white couples will be considered discriminatory and probably be sued.

With mixed-race marriage, those religious groups that only marry white or same-race couples will be deemed beyond the pale, marginalized and ostracized.

There have been many Christian countries, and they are no longer. They have been replaced by secular countries, and they are weakening. Only American civilization remains strong, and it does so because of its unique amalgam of values rooted in Judeo-Christian morality.

This civilization is now fighting for its life — as much here as abroad. Join the fight, or it will be gone as fast as you can say “Democrat.”

With a simple change, I am considered a bigoted, backwards idiot. I don’t want to equate racial inequality with the fight for equal treatment for gays and lesbians–they have different histories and issues–but they share a basic thread: the government should not discriminate against groups of people because of their identity.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.

3 Comments

  1. Posted 3/5/2004 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    Amen!

    I am so uplifted when I read ‘straight’ folks write such positive and supportive things about our fight for equality. It’s good to know we’re not alone. And, as we all know, most movements for equality of minorities need support from vocal and credible members of the majority in order for real change to happen.

    So… thanks. :)

  2. Posted 3/5/2004 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

    Nice post, Alex. Succinct, rational, and clever. Although we have to be careful with this comparison (as you note), I think it can be a constructive way of framing the debate.

  3. Posted 3/5/2004 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    Thanks, to you both. I was talking about this with someone recently and they asked why I was taking such a public stand on this; was it something personal? I.e., did I have close friends who wanted to marry and had been kept from it?

    In fact, among those whom I know who are gay or lesbians, most are in committed relationships, some decades long. For at least one of these couples, there was a legal issue in terms of death benefits and the like, but these could be relatively well taken care of with some creative legal work (trusts, etc.). While that certainly influences my opinion on the issue, it is not really why I’m public about it. There are two reasons, both of them pretty self-centered:

    1. Injustice makes me really, really mad.

    2. 20 years from now, I want to be able to look back and remember that I had the courage of my convictions and that I didn’t just play along with the crowd, or ignore the issue.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked *

*
*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

  • Tweets

  • Archives