Higgins: Gay Marriage Wrong Just Like Banning Interracial Marriage

Laurie Higgins of the Illinois Family Institute is one of the lesser-known members of the bigotsphere, but she’s making a case for a bigger role with her ability to make transparently silly arguments and bold declarations of vigilance. In her latest jeremiad, she goes all William Wallace:

No, the debate will never go away. Legally recognizing homoerotic unions as marriages is as profoundly wrong as were legal prohibitions of interracial marriage. While prohibitions of interracial marriage were based on the false belief that blacks and whites are inherently different, prohibitions of same-sex “marriage” are based on the true belief that men and women are different and that those differences have meaning for the public good.

Isn’t that a perfectly vague and meaningless phrase? Men and women are different — duh — and “those differences have meaning for the public good.” I think this is what Daniel Dennett calls a deepity. It sounds profound but it means absolutely nothing.

No, the debate over the nature of marriage and the government’s recognition and regulation of marriage will never go away. If “progressives”—our current public censors—don’t ban dissent on issues related to homoerotic identity politics, this debate, like the one over legalized feticide, will persist.

Protecting true marriage is second only to protecting the lives of the least among us in terms of its importance to the health and welfare of this once great nation. The twin moral crimes of legalizing the slaughter of the unborn and legally recognizing homoerotic unions as “marriages” are dramatic manifestations of the enmity between unsaved man and God.

This issue will remain until the end of this great nation or the end of redemptive history, whichever comes first.

Oh, I have no doubt that there will remain a hardcore group of bigots like Higgins who will never give up their quest to dehumanize gay people, just as there remains racists who won’t give up on their identical quests. But like those hardcore racists, bigots like Higgins are increasingly being marginalized and will soon find themselves pretty much shut out of respectable civil discourse. That’s called progress.

""I've got the best Mount. Mount Doom. Mount Doom. It's a terrific, tremendous mount. The ..."

Local School Has Another Proselytizing Teacher
"This is how I know you aren't arguing against my actual position.1. "But you're still ..."

How to Think Critically About the ..."
"Wow, I didn't think the various defenses of Moore could get any creepier, but this ..."

Pastor: Moore Liked Young Girls Because ..."
"I'm sure the same pastor is telling girls to stay chaste, otherwise they are "chewed ..."

Pastor: Moore Liked Young Girls Because ..."

Browse Our Archives

Follow Us!


What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • Artor

    She seems to have a fixation with the term, “homoerotic.” I guess all straight marriages are pure porn, amirite?

  • wscott

    “bigotsphere” = best new word ever! Don’t know if that’s a Brayton original or not, but I’m stealing it.

  • Michael Heath

    Ed’s blog post:

    Gay Marriage Wrong Just Like Banning Interracial Marriage

    Idiotic sure, but not a rare form of argument. Instead it’s equivalent to the very popular and equally fallacious argument by conservatives and libertarians who deny or avoid science’s findings regarding climate change in order to protect our economic security.

  • eric

    The twin moral crimes of legalizing the slaughter of the unborn and legally recognizing homoerotic unions as “marriages” are dramatic manifestations of the enmity between unsaved man and God.

    Preach it, sister! Make absolutely sure that every justice in the nation knows that you’re basing your opposition on sectarian moral rules!

  • dingojack

    For those who are time-short this morning, shorter ‘Missy’ Higgens:

    I THINK HOTSWEATYHOMOBUTSEXZ IS ICKY, AND GOD AGREES WITH ME!

    Now you can get to point-N-laugh stage without the tedium of unscrambling poor spelling, grammar and logic.

    No need to thank me!

    Dingo

  • scienceavenger

    While prohibitions of interracial marriage were based on the false belief that blacks and whites are inherently different, prohibitions of same-sex “marriage” are based on the true belief that men and women are different …

    So it was wrong to prohibit whites and blacks from marrying because they are not different, but it is right to prohibit gay marriage because gays are not different. Come again?

  • cptdoom

    …men and women are different… However Ms. Higgins and her like apparently believe all men are the same as all other men (so Adam Lambert=Ted Nugent) and all women are the same as all other women (Pam Anderson=Hillary Clinton) and intersex people don’t exist. It’s the equivalent of claiming all African-Americans have all the same shade of skin tone and there are no albinos.

  • marcus

    I don’t have my “bigot to English” dictionary, does anyone know what the fuck “redemptive history” is? And how do we end it?

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    Wrong as being left handed or blue-eyed or red -haired.

  • StevoR : Free West Papua, free Tibet, let the Chagossians return!

    That’s called progress.

    No. It ain’t called progress. It *is* progress.

    Ethical progress.

    Pity those who are left behind – contempt for those who choose to run backwards towards worse times when we thought and believed so much worse and harmed people on the basis of those old homophobic prejudices.

  • Pierce R. Butler

    ♫♪ ♫ Just you wait, Laurie ‘iggins, just you wait … ♪♫♪

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Homoerotic Union’s third album, “Meaning for the Public Good” was their best, I think, way better than “Public Censors”, which is overrated.

  • howardhershey

    Hmmm. I wonder, just wonder, if the people opposed to black-white marriages didn’t actually think that black was different from white. Seems I remember all sorts of claims that not only *were* blacks fundamentally different from whites, but that those differences, often as obvious to the naked eye as brown tones are to peach [unlike homosexuality] justified the anti-miscegenation laws. But apparently I am wrong on that.

  • Stacey C.

    I will say again, as someone who is half of an inter-racial, heterosexual marriage…Fuck You. It is *exactly* the same philosophically. (Once can argue that the history of racism in this country makes the degree different, but I’m not sure I’d necessarily agree.) Also, as someone above mentioned…this argument also erases people who do not believe in the gender binary. (But I’m sure she’s a-okay with that and probably doesn’t believe in gender fluid people.)

  • noastronomer

    I swear, some of these … arguments … could have been written by Douglas Adams.

  • brucemartin

    She uses the word homoerotic as the opposite of heterosexual. Does that mean that to her, hetero marriages are by definition free from eroticism? Maybe in her experience that’s true.

    Does she think that sexuality is bad, so everyone should be in a hetero marriage in order to terminate their sexuality?

    Well, that sort of is what Jesus is supposed to have said, right after he said it would be best if everyone would castrate themselves.

    Of course, some modern theologians may come along and say that, metaphorically, castration is the ground of all being. Or were those verses added in a later edition, such as the snake-handling bits? How far do we have to go down the rabbit hole of nonsense before we all admit that this is sourced on nothing but raving madness?

  • dugglebogey

    Homophobes are very keen to distance themselves from racists from the past who opposed interracial marriage because they sound EXACTLY the same and are making EXACTLY the same claims and predictions, which are false and will never happen.

    Look, if you’re a christian and you think gay marriage will bring about the end of times faster, that should be a good thing, so have a party or something. Find some way to deal with it, because it’s happening. You need to come to peace with it. Move on to your next incredibly hypocritical stance.

  • busterggi

    “Oh, I have no doubt that there will remain a hardcore group of bigots like Higgins who will never give up their quest to dehumanize gay people, just as there remains racists who won’t give up on their identical quests.”

    Still, you rarely hear Senators end their speeches by saying, “Carthage must be destroyed” anymore.

  • catbutler

    @8 -I believe she is referencing the return of jesus there and the end of the world.

  • http://behind-blue-eyes.us gworroll

    Ok. Argument starts off well enough. There are differences between men and women. This could justify differing treatment, but you still have to show that the specific alleged difference is actually real, and that differing treatment based on it will actually benefit society, and that this benefit outweighs the harm done by denying equality.

    Any less than 3/3 here, and it fails. She’s got maybe a .5/3, for recognizing there are differences, but failing to articulate the specific ones that are relevant to this issue.

  • eric

    Modus:

    Homoerotic Union’s third album, “Meaning for the Public Good” was their best, I think, way better than “Public Censors”, which is overrated.

    Don’t forget their single, “Homosexual Juggernaut.” It went paisley in just two weeks!

  • dingojack

    brucemartin – “Well, that sort of is what Jesus is supposed to have said, right after he said it would be best if everyone would castrate themselves.”

    Really?

    Matthew 19:10-12

    10 His disciples say unto him, If the case of the man be so with his wife, it is not good to marry.

    11 But he said unto them, All men cannot receive this saying, save they to whom it is given.

    12 For there are some eunuchs, which were so born from their mother’s womb: and there are some eunuchs, which were made eunuchs of men: and there be eunuchs, which have made themselves eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven’s sake. He that is able to receive it, let him receive it.

    Perhaps not.

    Dingo

  • thebookofdave

    Still, you rarely hear Senators end their speeches by saying, “Carthage must be destroyed” anymore

    It’s still pretty common, busterggi #18, but the phrase has morphed into “defund ACORN”.

  • freehand

    So, she says that miscegnation laws were wrong because, it turns out, blacks and whites are not fundamentally different (who knew?). But gay marriages are wrong because they’re not different enough. Stright marriages are AOK because men and women are, apparently, as different as Fundie Christians used to think blacks and whites were. [doodles on spreadsheet a a bit.]

    .

    OK. it seems pretty clear that marriages with other species are even better than straight human-human marriages. Didn’t interbreeding with Nephilim produce the Mighty Men of old?

    .

    I could come up with a simple and internally consistent moral code, but it would require recognizing informed consent as a foundational concept, and that would conflict with the authoritarian mindset of religious fundies, and it rather makes the invisible sky king* redundant, at least for moral matters, if he isn’t needed to determine moral behavior.

    .

    Besides, who in the religious world with any authority would claim that moral behavior is treating other people as we would want to be treated?

    .

    * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_king

  • thebookofdave

    does anyone know what the fuck “redemptive history” is?

    I don’t have the bigot-English dictionary either, marcus #8, but RWNJ Translator shows it to mean “when we reset the national clock back to the ’50s”.