Anti-Gay Group: At Least Slave Marriages Are Heterosexual, Right?

It seems this image has been circulating online as a darkly funny reminder that “Biblical marriage,” the oft-cited excuse for a conservative Christian’s opposition to marriage equality, is actually more complicated and controversial than we like to think.

But when Jennifer Thieme, a blogger for the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage’s Ruth Institute, saw the image, she and NOM interpreted it a little differently. She writes:

Look carefully at the image and you will see that in ALL of the examples, both genders are represented. This image reinforces the conservative position about needing a gender requirement, it does not undermine our position.

Her afterthought is my favorite example of how she’s just not getting it:

P.S. by using the Bible, aren’t these Leftists making a religious claim about the evolution of marriage?

As Zack Ford from ThinkProgress points out, selective Biblical interpretation does not a solid argument make.

About Camille Beredjick

Camille is a twentysomething working in the LGBT nonprofit industry. She runs an LGBT news blog at gaywrites.org.

  • LesterBallard

    How does she breathe with her head up her ass? 

    • Itarion

      That’s easy. It’s so far up, it’s poking through her throat.

  • C Peterson

    P.S. by using the Bible, aren’t these Leftists making a religious claim about the evolution of marriage?

    I’m not sure what that even means. “Leftists” I take to be anybody who supports equal rights. But religious claims? I think most people who support marriage equality realize that the institution of marriage has evolved over time (evolved in the sense of changed), and the Bible constitutes historical evidence of that, not religious evidence.

    • Michael

      Speaking of which,

      “I don’t support Gay Marriage in spite of being a Conservative. I support Gay Marriage because I am a Conservative.” — David Cameron.

      • 3lemenope

        Conservatism has come to mean something very dark and cruel in American political discourse, and for very good reason, over the past twenty years or so. As an American Conservative, this has become very disheartening for me. Thankfully, our modern counterparts across the pond are fond of reminding us it doesn’t have to be the way it has become.

        It has become annoying on some level; the jokes about reality having “a liberal bias” tend towards the self-congratulatory and snotty. And yet, because of how far the Conservative brand has deliberately sunk into the muck, it is difficult to retort without almost too much effort to be worth it.

        • Octoberfurst

           I often feel sorry for old time conservatives, i.e. the William F Buckley types. I grew up in a conservative household and my parents conservatism was nothing like the modern day conservatism. What passes as conservatism today is nothing but neo-fascism. Modern conservatism  is dominated by people who are  bigoted, misogynistic. anti-science and religious fanatics.  My parents were none of those things.

          • Inersphobia

            Well, I wouldn’t use WFB Jr. as an example.  He was openly homophobic, threatened to punch Noam Chomsky, twice, in a debate w/ him, argued in the creationist side on Firing Line.  He was a close-minded bully.  I agree there has been a sea change, but it is tough to see what’s really going on, when those yelling loudest are those whose positions are the most extreme, and when in the media, they bring on people who are diametrically opposed.  The fact that these extremes exist doesn’t tell you how many there are.  Homophobia is on the decline; that’s largely why these people are screaming so loudly, because they can’t stand it.

    • http://twitter.com/FelyxLeiter Felyx Leiter

      OOOOOH!!  She used the word “evolution!”  Is she making a claim that the theory is true?

      (And as dumb as my comment is, it still makes more sense than hers.)

  • Heidi

    Unless your god turns your wife into a pillar of salt. Then it’s one man and a kitchen condiment.

    • Moggie

      Or, in that case, one man and his daughters… ew.

    • http://twitter.com/FelyxLeiter Felyx Leiter

      NO, you can’t use a condiment, the Lord said, “Be fruitful and multiply.”

      Oh. Wait.

  • Fargofan

    It’s too bad they don’t allow comments on this at their website.

    I can’t believe they seem fine with the various marital…. arrangements, shall we say… as long as they’re heterosexual. So Biblical rape victims, it’s okay that you’re forced to marry your rapist because hey, he’s a man! Phew, what a relief!

    • CanadianNihilist

       Hypothetical question, what if your rapist is of the same sex as you? Do they force a marriage as the bible instructs or do their heads implode at the dilemma?

      • Baby_Raptor

        Better question: if a woman raped a man, would they still force the marriage?

        And no, this isn’t me making a rape joke. It’s just me pointing out inconsistencies. 

      • http://twitter.com/verutaus DannyM

        Well, I like what you said, but being realistic, there have been recent examples in Arab countries, where men guilty of “sodomy” (code for any homosexual activity) were executed, and it’s most likely one of the few positions fundamentalist Christians would probably agree with in the Islamist religion.  

        • http://twitter.com/verutaus DannyM

          Not that I have anything against Muslims.  Just providing an example of the hypocrisy with Christians.

  • compl3x

    You can’t fake that level of obliviousness.

  • Margaret Whitestone

    Always moving the goalposts whenever they’re presented evidence of their own duplicity.  “Yeah we’ve been claiming marriage has always been one man and one woman as God and the Bible demands but all that stuff you presented in the Bible still has both a man and a bunch of women so it’s not all that different from what we were originally saying”. It’s much like the way they brush off the fact that arguments against interracial marriage were virtually identical to those now used against same-sex marriage with “but interracial marriage is still between a man and a woman as it should be”.   

    • NickDB

       You just can’t argue with stupid.

  • vexorian

    I think I kind of understand this woman.

    I think that in her oblivious mind, the point of the image was not to show that biblical marriage is ridiculous and already incompatible with our moral framework. I think that she believes that the image is an argument to say “see? Marriage has evolved over the time, ergo gays can marry now”.

  • Gunstargreen

    How is she this dense? How does she possess even the most basic critical thinking skills required to survive for even one day? How?


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X