This Christian Group’s List of ‘Ingredients’ For Marriage Equality is Outrageous

Now that marriage equality has been signed into law in Illinois, the anti-gay-rights Illinois Family Institute is bored. Instead of redirecting their energy to a more worthy cause — like a political science class or maybe yoga — the nonprofit Christian ministry created a sloppy image attempting to satirize the state’s recent marriage victory.

Perhaps more than any other material they’ve ever produced, this graphic proves that IFI have no idea what they’re talking about. If this is the logic that guided their work, it’s no wonder they lost.

The fake label reads “Same-Sex Marriage: Emergency Energy for a Desperate Politician” and the product it’s selling is as like to convince you to oppose gay marriage as it is nutritious.

Here are their “ingredients” for same-sex marriage:

Artificial logic (processed in media bias), concentrated liberal left syrup, breakdown of family (no-fault divorce, abortion, sexual immorality) enriched corporate funds, unnatural biology, evaporated constitutional protections, free love color #1.

I’d appreciate some citations here. Also, properly placed commas.

Perhaps a breakdown of why our logic is so artificial? Or an explanation of how same-sex marriage will lead to abortion and no-fault divorce? How about some numbers illustrating enriched corporate funds? And for the love of Pat Quinn, WHERE can I get some lipstick in free love color #1?! (Which I’m sure the IFI will tell you is “Glitter.”)

Next, in the column where you’d read “Nutrition Facts” on your average Twinkie, the IFI lists “Social Cost Facts” for same-sex marriage (serving size: Illinois). A couple of these are simple regurgitations of your average mindless Christian rhetoric: Political Correctness 100%, Public Emotion 70%, Media Support 200%. That sort of thing.

Others, though, are more infuriating. A selection:

  • Tolerance for Opposing Views 0g, 0%. No. Intolerance is the unwillingness to accept beliefs or behavior that differ from your own. I disagree with you, but I’m not trying to take your rights away on the basis of your behavior. That’s what you’re doing to me. Go away.
  • Religious Liberties 1g, 2%. Again, no. Illinois’ marriage equality law, which is literally called the Religious Freedom and Marriage Fairness Act, is one of the most religion-friendly laws of its kind. Under the Illinois law, your church has no obligation whatsoever to participate in same-sex marriages if it doesn’t want to. It actually gets in the way of our ability to consider ourselves completely equal in the eyes of society. Quit your whining.
  • Interest of Children 0g, 0%. Excuse me?! There are 25,000 homeless youth in Illinois and another 17,000 in foster care. Look me in the eye and tell me the worst thing that could happen to these kids is to bring them into a loving home with two moms or two dads. Not to mention the decades of research proving that same-sex couples are just as qualified to raise children as your run-of-the-mill straight folks. But go ahead. Tell me my gayness is going to ruin a kid’s life.

(Hemant’s note: They would *totally* look you in the eye and tell you that. That’s how awful these people are.)

I love the summary, too:

  • Total Social Value: WAY Less Than Costs (Can I see your math?)
  • Morality: Less than OK (Speaking of artificial logic!)
  • Consequences: Uncalculable [sic] (The consequences do not exist!)

Reading this is exhausting! The kicker to the whole thing is at the bottom right: “Made on logic that also produces polygamy, polyamory, and pedophilia.” Actually, IFI, I’m pretty sure the Bible is all about pedophilia and polygamy, and polyamory is a perfectly legitimate practice that doesn’t deserve to be lumped in with the others. Not that you’ll ever take the time to learn that.

For the most part, there’s no use getting worked up over this. Marriage equality is legal in Illinois and the IFI can’t do anything about it; wahoo! Regardless, I extend a heartfelt thanks to the Illinois Family Institute for the laugh and for demonstrating how mindless the arguments against marriage equality truly are. If these are supposed to represent the best arguments the opposition can offer, the dominoes will fall in the other states in no time.

About Camille Beredjick

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

  • LDavidH

    “Your example is not logic.” Why not? Looking at the facts & drawing conclusions is logic, AFAIK.

    “Are we overrun with zombies outside of fiction?” I sure hope not – and no Christian says we might be. Jesus’ bodily (not just “spiritual”) resurrection was a miracle, not an every-day occurrence (and “resurrection” is by definition different from “becoming an undead zombie”, anyway).

    “Why is the world ignoring this obvious possibility?” Maybe because it would require eye-witnesses, and despite all you atheists trying to claim the opposite, the gospels are eye-witness accounts. Back in 1997, in Albania, I saw a crowd overrun a military van and steal guns from it. That was 16 years ago, and I’ve not yet written it down anywhere. I still count as an eye-witness, and I will be one until I die. So even if the gospels were written down a few decades after the events, if the authors were eye-witnesses, they still count as eye-witness records.

    Plus there were still people around who were very hostile to the Christian church (Jewish priests etc), who would quickly have pointed out any fabrications in the texts. The fact that all they could come up with was that the disciple stole the body (which is highly unlikely) shows that they had nothing on the disciples’ story.

    Rehashing arguments that have already been answered won’t get you anywhere; so it’s high time we stopped. Live long and prosper!

  • http://roguemedic.com/ Rogue Medic

    LDavidH,

    “Your example is not logic.” Why not? Looking at the facts & drawing conclusions is logic, AFAIK.

    Logic requires that the conclusions are reasonably related to the facts.

    -

    Jesus’ bodily (not just “spiritual”) resurrection was a miracle,

    This is a poorly documented story, about a person who may not have existed, written decades after the supposed event.

    Resurrection is a logical conclusion only if that is all you can think of, because that is what you already believed, but that is logical fallacy, not logic.

    -

    “Why is the world ignoring this obvious possibility?” Maybe because it would require eye-witnesses,

    No.

    It would require evidence.

    Eyewitness testimony is horribly inaccurate.

    Eyewitness testimony to imaginary events is not a miracle.

    Here is just one of many recent papers looking at the widespread problem of false memries.

    False memories in highly superior autobiographical memory individuals.
    Patihis L, Frenda SJ, Leport AK, Petersen N, Nichols RM, Stark CE, McGaugh JL, Loftus EF.
    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Nov 18. [Epub ahead of print]
    PMID: 24248358 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24248358

    -

    Back in 1997, in Albania, I saw a crowd overrun a military van and steal guns from it. That was 16 years ago, and I’ve not yet written it down anywhere. I still count as an eye-witness, and I will be one until I die.

    How different are your memories from what really happened?

    Probably quite different.

    Or, maybe you are right and valid reproducible evidence of the fallibility of memory is wrong.

    -

    So even if the gospels were written down a few decades after the events, if the authors were eye-witnesses, they still count as eye-witness records.

    And eyewitness records are very unreliable and untrustworthy.

    They count as unreliable and untrustworthy accounts.

    Eyewitnesses will swear to all sorts odf things that never happened.

    “I was abducted by aliens.”

    That is just one example of the eyewitness testimony that you find so believable.

    -

    Plus there were still people around who were very hostile to the Christian church (Jewish priests etc), who would quickly have pointed out any fabrications in the texts. The fact that all they could come up with was that the disciple stole the body (which is highly unlikely) shows that they had nothing on the disciples’ story.

    Why didn’t these people believe?

    Why didn’t they believe?

    It seems that the less people know about this resurrection, the more they believe.

    Provide evidence that other Jews took these fantasies seriously.

    .


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X