Here’s a new “rainbow coalition” trying to keep gay people from having equal rights. How Orwellian.
These poor people, not being able to discriminate against gays!
Recent Comments
- John C: Yes there is friend, but you can’t know/see Him in (y)our... on God Hates Checkered Whiptail Lizards!!!
- Adamf: There ain’t no god, it aint truth, and you are a pathetic... on God Hates Checkered Whiptail Lizards!!!
- Stony: My [highly conservative] family delight in calling on the ghost... on Mr. Conservative on religion and politics
- trj: Any ideas? Well, the Bible is cobbled together by a lot of contributors, and though... on Why Are You Here, Jesus?
- Manny: I’m a bit confused the more I read the Bible. Some of it just doesn’t... on Why Are You Here, Jesus?
- sdbear: Does it matter to anyone that what he said is simply the truth? on Cult Leaders vs The Pope
Funny $&#!@ From 9 Laughs
I'm one of the contributors to 9 Laughs:
Subscribe by Email
Archives
I’ve seen this before. Notice the predominant emotion? Fear, even manufactured fear, breeds intolerance.
Well, except that these people seem to be ok with SERIAL KILLERS getting married and having kids…
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/psychology/s_k_groupies/2.html
I’m curious, what are they talking about when they say that it’s being brought into their lives? What part of gay marriage affects them?
Um… How would gay marriage “take away” that one chick’s individual freedom? Or how would it change the way that older woman lives? That makes no sense.
I’m curious, what are they talking about when they say that it’s being brought into their lives? What part of gay marriage affects them?
It curtails their “right” to force their views and practices on others.
Complete the Analogy
@ Daniel
Calling themselves the ‘Rainbow Coalition’ isn’t necessarily Orwellian. Some Christians I know want to reclaim the rainbow as a symbol of god’s promise never to flood us again — they are pissed it has been co-opted by a group of ‘sinners.’
Now, if they called themselves ‘The Coalition for Gay Rights,’ then it’d be Orwellian.
I wouldn’t put it past them, though. “We’re the Coalition for Gay Rights. We want the gays to have rights. But only the ones we approve of.”
It’s raining men, y’all.
Straight people : Hurt by gay marriage :: Amish : Hurt by Oil prices
Because some how what I do in my own home is worse than half the straight marriages that end it divorce?
What’s the worst of all is that people are teaching their children it’s OK to be homophobes.
How did the Dr. in Cali or the church in NJ end up in that situation?
Is the Dr. being forced to treat gays, and is that thought of as a bad thing?
I can’t even imagine a hypothetical for the NJ church group… I know there was some talk about penalizing churches who wouldn’t hold ceremonies for same-sex couples, but I think it was just talk.
Seems disingenuous to me.
The church point is total bullshit. No one is forcing churches to do anything. Gays would probably get married in a courthouse. They don’t even have to marry straight people if they don’t want to.
Here is a decent rebuttal from HRC: http://www.hrc.org/12470.htm
They also link to the audition reels for the ad.
Did anyone inform the actual Rainbow Coalition about this ad? I can’t imagine that they would be very happy having their name abused by this locus of inane stupidity.
Wouldn’t it be hilarious if they were sued?
When it comes to Joe Christian, it is about fear, but also about duty to church. “My pastor said homosexuality is wrong so I believe it!”
When it comes to the church & pastors, it is all about power and control. The church, in order to survive, needs issues to drive a wedge between its followers and mainstream society. They then spin the situation as “Look! WE are being persecuted for our beliefs! Help, we’re being oppressed! Our country is being taken away from us!”
I saw the man behind the curtain when I read Josh McDowell’s “The New Tolerance” which espouses these ideas.
Did these people not know that homosexuals have existed for as long as mankind it’s self? That we arrived within the last decade? Just think…that poor mother will have to pay to send her child to private school and that ignorant doctor will have to ditch her degree and change careers. The church will have to do a background/profile check on it’s entire congregation. Ignorance and intolerance can be expensive! By the way, why is the last guy talking about rainbow coalitions? Does he think it will create a connection with the gay community? Does he think that he can influence and change our minds with those words, much like saying “Abracadabra”. Another by the way…God’s rainbow has seven colors, the gay community rainbow has six. The people in this video are bored…and boring!
“Another by the way…God’s rainbow has seven colors, the gay community rainbow has six.”
Why does the homosexual lobby hate indigo? ;)
Oh man, I would so totally like to see all women turn lesbian, or even better, bi-sexual! Think of all the Pr0n!!!
For the gay porn, meh, not my cup of tea, but there’d be around 3 billion happy consumers as well :D
Wait a second…
If all men turn gay, and I am a man… D’Oh! *headpalm*
As to how homosexual marriage would hurt straight marriage, I read somewhere that, while it of course would have no effect on a straight marriage between equals, it would affect a fundie Xian marriage of submission by confusing the “obvious” roles of marriage. Can’t give those Xian women the idea that marriage isn’t about a man owning a woman.
Just my $.02.
My children have been raised around my gay friends. Men and women. They know what it means to be gay and I have always answered their questions as best I could.
Now, my children are not perfect angles but they are good kids. My girl is 13 and my boy is 12. Both make good grades in school. Both have friends and are social. And get this, My daughter likes boys, and my son likes girls. Even after growing up around gay and lesbian folks, both of them like the opposite sex. Isn’t that weird? They didn’t catch teh gey.
Of course neither one is allowed to date just yet, but my daughter always talks to her friends about “cute boys” and my son talks about “cute girls” and who he wants to date.
So, I guess that means that gay isn’t contagious.
As far as the rest of that video is concerned. All I can think to say is that for too long we have let religion stifle progress. Not just social progress, as in this case but scientific as well.
I for one don’t really care what god you worship or if you worship one at all but it should not stop our society from experimenting with the hope of making the world better for everyone.
anyway, just my $.02
Hey, no Alex Guggenheim telling you have an obsession with gays?
This is a state issue, not religious. Churches won’t be required to marry gay people, so they can continue to believe whatever they want to.
Other than fearing god’s wrath reigning down fire and lighting bolts in the “storm that is coming”, this entire campaign is ludicrous.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vufl2uBeN0s&feature=channel_page
I’m not sure why they posted this video.
“i don’t believe treating different things differently is discrimination”
that’s a perfect defense for any argument that could be brought against you. it works even better when you are a little crazy. then people don’t even want to argue with you because they realize that you’re crazy and will say things that don’t make sense relative to the argument that you were having.
if we were talking about fruit, then yes, treating a banana different than an apple is not discrimination.
since we’re talking about people, treating them differently because you don’t like them is discrimination.
why are bigots always so stupid about it?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/vp/30145786#30145786
This is Rachel Maddow’s response to some audition tapes for this group. The relevant part starts at: 2:08
Isn’t it funny how NOM (nom nom nom…) is claiming that the Human Rights Campaign’s refutation of that stupid video is an “attack”? Fools–you start a fight, don’t be surprised or pissed if you get your ass handed to you.
Also, get a load of this. I went to their website. I was very curious about what the threat to marriage was! So, I went to the section specifically labeled: “The Threat to Marriage”.
http://www.nationformarriage.org/site/c.omL2KeN0LzH/b.4634317/k.5506/The_Threat_to_Marriage.htm
Does anyone else not see what I didn’t see?
I love their bit about “(a) educate the public about the consequences of same-sex marriage in Massachusetts”. I live in Massachusetts, I have seen no changes except that I know two couples that can happily say they really are married. When I see the A-girls (I’ll leave names out) together, I see an extremely happy couple, nothing more. When I hear C talk about his husband, I see a very happy man (I only briefly met his husband once, he doesn’t share the hobby we do). The number of legally married couples in Massachusetts has gone up, but nothing has really changed, except that the wedding industry has more customers, and really much of the wedding industry was making money on commitment ceremonies and “weddings” that were not official, legal weddings before it became legal, so not much has changed at all.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/atheism%20babies/zoeandjuly/Atheism.jpg?o=1
Is that you in the pic? :)
i see no statement as to what the threat is. they talk about what states are doing what and who is paying money, but they don’t have any kind of statement that says “gay marriage is a threat because_____”
“A rainbow coalition of people of every creed and color are coming together in love to protect marriage”
A rainbow coalition are coming together!
Did no one proof read their ad?
Just saw Colbert’s spoof of this commercial. It’s the best one so far.
HAHAHA yeah. I just came to post about that.
Man: I’m a teacher…
Bolt of lightning strikes him.
Man with lisp: Oh no! The homo-storm got me!
NO NO No no…. The NOM accidentally released the rough draft of their ad. Either that or that Dastardly LIBRUL MEEEDJAH has suppressed the real one in favor of this obviously flawed initial version (How DARE they!!!!)
Fortunately, “Sadly, No” has taken upon themselves the onerous task of tracking down the real</i ad, the one actually intended for distribution, and has thoughtfully provided it to the public for viewing.
Here is the TRUE ad, the one we were really meant to see.
Putrid illogical fear-mongering such as this is highly typical of many Christians in USA today. Frankly, after seeing this video, I start to feel a bit tyrannical and entertain fantasies about rounding them all up and putting them on spaceships to Mars…without any oxygen tanks.
Sigh…I guess that would make me just as ignorant and dangerous as they are.
This may have been said elsewhere, but why is it that the most homophobic people always seem to be Xtians. What happened to Jesus’ instructions to “Love ye one another”? Or does that only apply to people who are like you? When Xtians actively preach against love, there is something very wrong.
How fucked up in the head does one have to be, to believe this BS about anyone else’s marriage being a threat to theirs?
I mean I could as well contend, that the Christians actually take away my freedom by expressing their beliefs in public, “filling their quivers”, and so on. I dunno, shoot them, lock’em up or something. This way anyone’s way of life is a threat to everybody else’s freedom.
But seriously, what about religious indoctrination of children? That’s true threat to personal freedom and enslaving kids to religious institutions should be forbidden by law.
I notice that NOM (nom nom) didn’t mention that, shortly after legalizing gay marriage, Canadian kids started turning gay by the millions, the country was struck by a pague of volcanoes, and every price at Wal-Mart suddenly ended with the numbers “99″.
These people are desperate: New York turned all gay last week with the governor proposing gay marriage to the entire legislature!
Very reasonable response to the video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YGe8DwBs-s&feature=related (“Response to NOM’s “Gathering Storm” ad”)
http://media.photobucket.com/image/faggot%20tree/taiggy/FaggotTree.jpg
Anyone see this parody with Lance Bass and Alicia Silverstone (among others)?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4w16aTJ808I
Wow. I thought the original vid was crazy enough… But that one was even better. Lol.
Pingback: A Gaythering Storm
I believe in the sanctity of marriage between a man and woman. Why do many of us try to abuse the freedoms that have been given in this country? Why is it that the minorities always have to try and prove to the rest of common society that what they practice needs to be accepted by all. Your gay; great for you. Be free and practice it all you like. Don’t, however, try to push your same values and philosophies on me or my country.
Here’s another question: why are you an intellectually blighted bigot?
Who is trying to make you gay, Paul? Us rational folks just want gay people to enjoy the legal benefits of marriage (such as hospital visitation and inheritance rights) and have the right to call it marriage. We aren’t saying that you have to believe it is okay to be gay or make you enter into a gay marriage yourself, or tell your church it must perform gay marriages. (BTW – the concept of marriage is far older than any of the large religions currently being practiced, so don’t say that marriage is a religious concept.)
And when did you purchase the USA? Until you purchase the country, it is no more yours than any other citizens, it is our country, and all citizens deserve the same rights; this includes freedom of religion (which includes freedom from religion), so the fact that some churches state the being gay is wrong, does not mean that gay people shouldn’t have the right to get married.
signed,
A Straight Girl, Proud to be from the 1st State to Legalize Gay Marriage
Notice how you posted their video here so you could attack them. This is the type of thing they are talking about. What about their freedom? What about their way of life? What happened to tolerance all of a sudden? You yourself evidently do not believe in tolerance. Even your website name says it. I would be highly surprised if you even allow this message to be posted, because it’s not what you want to hear. Speaking of “unreasonable,” how hypocritical is it for you to judge that someone else’s faith is unreasonable, yet you will not allow others to say that yours is unreasonable?
um…..Most of us atheists don’t say we have “faith”, it requires actively believing something to have faith. Non-belief is specifically lacking faith that something exists. Non-belief in a god or gods is what most atheists profess. Therefore, others saying that our “faith” is unreasonable would be a complete misnomer. Others have the freedom/right to say that our lack of belief is unreasonable if they so choose. They can go right ahead and start a blog about it (haven’t seen one yet). If they were to say that their faith was “reasonable”, we would question their understanding of the term “reasonable”. The whole concept of having faith in something because it is what you were taught or what you read in a book written around 2000 years ago by nomads who didn’t even speak the languages the book has since been translated into, “because you feel it in your heart” or whatever is, by definition, unreasonable. It take provability for believing in something to be reasonable.
Freedom of the Press is why the owners of this website (and us commenters, as the owners choose to allow) can say what we do. Religious folks have the freedom to say that gay marriage is wrong, they can make all the ads they want saying that; but that is not all they want, they want to make laws that line up with their religious beliefs, denying rights to others, that is not okay.
The site owners posting the video to talk about it is not what NOM is talking about, NOM is talking about the fact that their religious beliefs are not being allowed to be the law of the land. If NOM and other faith-based groups would keep their religion in their homes and churches and stop trying to put it into government, we would not need to discuss them on sites like this.
JESUS LOVES EVERYONE! I AM THE WAY THE TRUTH AND THE LIFE AND HE THAT COMETH TO ME I WILL IN NO WISE CAST OUT.COME TO ME ALL YOU WHO LABOR AND ARE HEAVY LADEN AND I WILL GIVE YOU REST.
Do you know that you almost converted me with such wise words … then I realised that you’d spelt labour without and ‘u’ and you had lost me – after all everyone knows that Jesus was English not Americian.
If you’re going to spam that crap, for fuck sake at least turn caps lock off next time.
Does Jesus give those who labour rest by revoking their collective bargaining rights so they cannot avoid furlough days?
She doesn’t wanna think about gays, or look at them, or see them on TV. It’s ruining her hopes of a living an insulated, ‘Pleasantville’ life.
So it’s taking away her freedom. Duh.
All of us gay guys will be out and about, raping and drugging and raping again all the hunky super-straight guys and forcing them to get married so we can all have one big ole White Party down on South Beach. She’ll have no choice but to marry a nebbish dude that the UniBrain of All Faggotry kicked out of the Gay Collective. As for the older woman, once gays get the right to marry, we’ll all quit our jobs as hairdressers, and she’ll have to do her hair herself. Imagine the horror!
Stop taking away their rights to live as bigoted spleenweasels! It’s unfair, making them acknowledge gays as human beings! We’re just awful, intolerant people not allowing them to legislate their bigotry.
They are using it intentionally to try and change the meaning. The reason I cite it as Orwellian is because they have taken a term that is usually meant to support gay rights, and are using it to tear down gay rights. Thus, Orwellian.
At least in my view.
We may BELIEVE that the rainbow is just light refracting in little drops of water, but you know, God really put it there as the symbol of His pact with Israel.
Science, always messing with the Truth
Some Christians I know want to reclaim the rainbow as a symbol…
Apparently Christians want to monopolize all of symbology. Fish? Fishers of men. Lamb? Lamb of God. Star? Star of Bethlehem. Two sticks crossed? Jesus’ crucifixion. A bird? The dove of peace = the Holy Spirit. A shamrock? The Holy Trinity. Eggs and bunnies? Jesus’ resurrection. A crockoduck? bizarre brain-dead creationism. On and on.
Well, not if the Liberal, Gay, Atheistic, Baby-Eating, God Hating Majority of Evil People get their way. They’ll force that poor, pretty, blonde, Aryan woman to…do, or not do something. Didn’t you see the video? She’ll have. no. choice!
The Horror!
Oh, and someone should really touch up her roots.
They might have to see a gay couple sometime. The horror!
Ha! Good one.
that is perfect. I’m so going to steal that :)
straight people : hurt by gay marriage :: creationism : actual science?
Straight people : Hurt by gay marriage :: chicken little : the sky is falling
Texas Instruments users : hurt by use of Hewlett Packard calculators
The myth that homosexuals wage a campaign of conversion (i.e. they are a threat to “our” children) seems like an important aspect of the anti-gay crusade. Any idea if that’s true?
I know my dad is strongly homophobic and strongly believes that myth.
It was not a church. In fact, they had some sort of pavilion, that was tax free because they allowed it to be used by the public. Then a lesbian couple wanted to use it for their commitment ceremony, and the group said no. “Open to the public” means “open to the public” and their tax free status was revoked.
The city did not state that the group had to allow gay commitment ceremonies on their property. They just had to start paying taxes if they were going to pick and choose who could use the pavilion.
I have no idea what the doctor talks about, but the NJ church group owned a beachfront property they rented out for public use, and then a lesbian couple wanted to celebrate their civil union at that property, but were denied. They took the church group to the court, and the NJ court ruled that the church group discriminated against the lesbian couple, which is against the laws in NJ.
It is Orwellian in the same way that the 1984 name “Ministry of Peace” is Orwellian. Have you read 1984? It’s really good. If you like dystopian fiction. I do.
I intended to reply to Elliott.
Yes, I’ve read 1984. Great book. Changed my life.
I guess I see ya guys’s point, if you take it that they were trying to deceive.
I was just pointing out it could be intepreted as a quarrel over a symbol, instead of a deliberate attempt to pull a fast one, although that’s undoubtedly part of it.
Maybe it’s an organization composed entirely of leprechauns.
Totally. Those roots are nasty.
The HRC link aubrey posted below enumerates the claims and what the claims are probably referring to (scroll to the bottom half). In all three cases, facts are subtly (or dramatically) changed to reframe the dispute, which are actually about the state enforcing anti-discrimination laws (not anti-gay-marriage laws) and resisting one pair of parents’ attempt to change school curriculum for all the school’s children based on their religious beliefs.
I always respond to that by saying “Is there anything anyone could do to make you gay?” To which they will surely respond “no.”
Quod Erat Pwndum.
Well to be “fair” there is this!
http://machall.com/view.php?date=2006-08-28
It seems to me that if that’s their only problem with gay marriage, then they’re begging the question. If you were to ask them what’s wrong with a child turning out gay, then what would they say? When a person argues that it won’t cause children to catch the gay, then they’re implicitly accepting the unspoken premise that being gay is undesirable and to be avoided.
You are presumably not an impressionable child. Not that this makes it a strong argument. Just stronger.
But, but, but…children are weak and easy to lead astray! I am wise in the ways of the world and would never be taken in by your devil temptations. But my children? My naive, sheltered children?!
That whole approach reminds me of that lady from the Simpsons, I think it was Flanders’ wife, who would always shriek “Think of the children!”
If you can believe in an invisible sky daddy, you can believe in almost anything. Rational thinking and skepticism are foreign words to you.
Seriously, I have witnessed it again and again that people truely believe that the world works not by a set of specific rules, but by what they think just is right, and act accordingly.
Example: [to teacher] What?! My kid is not stupid! Don’t you dare say otherwise. My good boy simply does not deserve an F! [teacher shows exam; paper is empty; students name is misspelled] But…but…but… okay, Mister, you are going to hear from my lawyer! [teacher gets subpoena a few weeks later]
Most people are unable to wrap their minds around the idea that the universe doesn’t give a sh*t about anything that does or does not happen to them.
“Think of the children!”
I think it was Rev. Lovejoy’s wife, actually, and I think this is the very sort of thing they meant to lampoon.
If rainbows existed before the Flood we’d be finding them in the fossil evidence. But we don’t!
Secular science fails again.
Well, their name is “Rainbow Coalition…”, which is almost certainly intentionally duplicitous. Maybe not. But I don’t see how that could be interpreted as not trying to deceive.
Granted.
I’m saying their motives for choosing that name may have been more complex than simply obfuscating the true nature of their organization by cloaking themselves in the symbology of their opponents.
Or maybe this organization is actually headed by a fellowship of spectral phenomena.
LOL!
You sir, win exactly two (2) Internets.
lol
no transitional forms for the rainbow then? It simply appeared all as it is now? It’s irreducibly complex! A rainbow with only one colour wouldn’t be useful.
One point for Intelligent design!!
Hallelujah
it’s just a glorified purple. Indigo is totally gay.
Wait…
I vote for the Pluto-ization of Indigo. It’s not a color, it’s just Blue and Violet’s awful bastard child!
From my personal experience I can conclude that the vast majority of people that have issues with the LGBT community in fact have problems with their own sexuality and sexual identity. I guess that’s another reason why these morons think that gay is contagious.
As long as you are not sure about what body parts you want to stick in whom (or what) in which particular way, you will always have these nagging what-ifs in your head.
Yes, ITA. A lot of the objection to gay marriage relates to the whole role/gender based ideology that modern fundamentalism espouses. Gay marriage overturns the apple cart of the fundamentalist definitions of male headship.
Hm. That makes a surprising amount of sense. Do you remember where you found it?
FUNDIE: “But… you’re both men.”
GAY 1: “Yeah, so?”
FUNDIE: “So… do you eat out every night?”
GAY 2: “No, you’re thinking of lesbians.” (high-fives Gay 1)
FUNDIE: “Then… how do you have dinner?”
GAY 1: “I make it some nights. He makes it other nights.”
FUNDIE: “But… a man’s role… provider…” (head explodes)
Not sure, but I think I read about it at “Dispatches from the Culture Wars” (scienceblogs.com/dispatches). I think it may have been in the comments rather than a post.
Oh LOL. I love this.
Q:Why do leprechauns laugh when they run?
A:They’re so low to the ground that the grass tickles their balls.
Then your gay friends haven’t been working hard enough. How are they going to qualify for their Williams-Sonoma toasters? They need to step it up!
I agree. Too many people treat being gay like it’s a filthy, terrible disease. IT’S NOT!!!
“Now, my children are not perfect angles but they are good kids.”
I don’t like any kid that isn’t a perfect 90 degrees.
Not weird at all. As a matter of fact (one that I like to point out to gay haters) all the gays I know were raised by heterosexual couples. Guess they weren’t good examples. LOL
I freaking knew it.
“I don’t like any kid that isn’t a perfect 90 degrees.”
I like my kids seared, yet rare, with a core temperature of around 135 degrees.
Spare us your lewd suggestions. The angle of the kids should be 180 degrees, in order for them to be perfectly straight.
ARRRGGGG!!
angels! crap.
Ty, why do you have to be so obtuse? ;)
Edit: This video was on YouTube but, big surprise, it got pulled. Apparently, NOM called it a copy write violation.
If I had any anti-gay issues (and I don’t), that clip on Rachael Maddow would end it for me. Fear? Bad enough, especially from ignorant people. But fake fear? Pathetic, over-reaching, emoting, and above all, LYING! When you gotta lie to make your point…game over.
Here’s an excerpt from one of the nations popular evangelical pastors, which he freely excepts into his church group:
“Free speech has to be free speech for everybody,” he says. “Some people feel today if you disagree with them that’s hate speech…I’m neither afraid of gays, nor do I hate gays. In fact, I love them, but I do disagree with some of their beliefs, and I have that constitutional right.”
Warren notes that he is also being criticized from the right for agreeing to speak at the inauguration of a Democrat who supports gay rights and abortion rights.
“I’m doing this because I love America and it’s a historic opportunity and it’s an honor to be a part of any inauguration of any president,” he says. And, describing his relationship with Obama, he says, “We’re friends and we admire each other even though we disagree on some things.”
You mean absolutely no mention of the Bible?
If so, it’s mentioned briefly in the Why Marriage Matters section. BTW, funny that one of their many very stupid arguments against gay marriage is that it opens up for polygamy. Yeah, that’d really be against the Bible.
I don’t see any threats. But I didn’t read very carefully.
Wasn’t that what they always wanted for these issues decided by the people elected legislature and not by the courts. But now when the pro gay marriage are gaining in that arena suddenly they start whining about evil gay pouring money into the campeins of pro gay marriage candidates. I don’t remember any of them complain when fundies are pouring billions into candidates who support their agenda. Apparently being a hypocrite is not a sin.
And here’s this pastor on Proposition 8:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IjeeYwQnVxc
Rick Warren: “… I’m neither afraid of gays, nor do I hate gays. In fact, I love them, but I do disagree with some of their beliefs, and I have that constitutional right.”
Yeah, and he’ll still have that right when gay marriage is legal. So why does he bring up the constitution? Smells like a strawman to me.
shhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Mmm, you get points for proper usage of “begging the question”, but I don’t think that’s a strong argument. Religious people do tend to believe the premise that being gay is undesirable, and they don’t apologize for it. In theory, they are objecting to their own child potentially becoming gay, which is bad (because God said so); not objecting to any child becoming gay, which may or may not be bad from the perspective of that child’s parents.
You are correct about that, but I think that even most religious people realize that “because God said so” is not an acceptable argument against gay marriage. If their entire argument boils down to “because God says so” then there’s no point in even having the discussion. The point I’m trying to make is that if they’re trying to present a valid secular argument against gay marriage, then they need to establish that being gay is a bad thing before there’s any discussion of kids turning gay.
I think that for hate mongers, it’s a requirement.
It’s perfectly grammatical… in England. In which case, one wonders why the Brits are still trying to write our laws. Didn’t we fight a war over this at some point? Didn’t we win?
Yeah, pretty ironic. You’d think that with a name like “Threat to Marriage” they’d state some threat. Apparently the only threat is Gay Marriage spreading? O noz, not teh gay.
Personally, I think he’s right.
You’ll totally get bought a lot of drinks with fruit and umbrellas in them!
Yeah. You’d think that that would be one of their strongest arguments. Pointing out how horrible places are that have legalized gay marriage, and underlining every negative directly related to it.
I don’t think any of you are on the level. ;-)
This conversation wins so much.
It’s totally FABULOUS!!!!
Incredibly, I know someone who thinks that gay couples should not be allowed to adopt children, because they might turn out gay. WTF!? No matter who raises it, it might turn out gay. Who Cares!