Conservative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage
Conservative Feminism
Glenn Beck came out and mocked opponents of gay marriage recently. “YOU are WRONG, Mr. Beck”, says Red State Feminists’ Red State Gal.
Red State Feminists
FAITH * FAMILY * WOMANPOWER
From the Red State Feminist Blog:
Mr. Beck, On Same-Sex Marriage You Are Wrong
Red State Feminists were thrilled at the recent rally by Glenn Beck and guests such as Sarah Palin to call America to a desire for spiritual renewal. RSFs enthusiastically endorse that call, and appreciate what Mr. Beck has done to issue that call.
How sad, then, we were to see the clip from the O’Reilly Show on August 11, 2010, with Mr. Beck stating that same-sex marriage is not a threat to America, and even making fun of those who believe that it is a threat by mockingly saying, “Oooh, will the gays come and get us? Thomas Jefferson said, “If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?” He went on to explain that as long as religions retained the right to state that they consider homosexuality a sin, then it really wasn’t a very important issue for him or for the nation.
Ack. Many Red State Feminists are mothers, and what we “mama grizzlies” would retort to Mr. Beck is, “Mr. Beck, it isn’t about your leg or your pocket, it’s about the kids!” When male conservative pundits do not understand what female conservative mothers understand about what threatens America, the conservative movement has a real problem. Underscoring our point, Sarah Palin, mother of five and mama grizzly extraordinaire, strongly opposes same-sex marriage and supports a federal ban on same-sex marriage. (Interestingly, Ann Coulter, who is not a mother, had no problem being a headline speaker at Homocon, the gathering of homosexual conservatives, who, among other things, support same-sex marriage.)
What is the threat we mama grizzlies see? It goes back to what you think marriage is about, first of all, and second, it goes back to whether you believe the origin of marriage is divine. Let’s take the first point first. Many think that marriage is in the first place about procreation. Red State Feminists beg to differ. As we have argued on our website before, the purpose of marriage is to make true, equal, loving partnerships between the two halves of humanity necessary for humanity to continue: men and women. And in establishing those partnerships and in ensuring equality between men and women in those partnerships, marriage ensures that all new human beings will learn from their earliest days how to live in peace, equality, and love with the other half of humanity and will look forward to forming such loving, equal heterosexual partnerships in the future themselves.
Now it is true that many cultures have perverted marriage, so that in some areas of the world, such as Afghanistan, marriage is more like domestic slavery. But that is the antithesis of what marriage is supposed to produce in a society, and we can condemn those oppressive marriages as being a real perversion of what marriage was meant to be and to do.
But in some places, like America, people have a real shot at living in real marriages. The tremendous blessings this has wrought for our country are undeniable, as marriages with equal partnership produce happiness not only for the couple in question, but also a genuine understanding of how to live gender equality in the larger society.
Same-sex marriage undercuts those gains. Same-sex marriage states by definition that individual and societal happiness is not dependent upon forming loving, equal partnerships with the other half of the human race. That very statement is a grave threat to every woman in the United States, Mr. Beck. Furthermore, while gay parents can certainly be great parents, what they are implicitly teaching their children is that either a mother or a father is completely unnecessary, and again by implication, that it is not necessary or even praiseworthy to strive to bring children into the world in a context where they can witness for themselves their own father and their own mother in a loving, equal partnership.
Consider “Doogie” Howser and his same-sex partner, who have bought eggs and rented a womb in order to have twins. They are saying that they are under no obligation to allow their children to have a mother, that it is all right to purposefully and premeditatedly exclude from their children’s lives the love of a mother. Mr. Beck, this is the height of inhumanity. This is erasure of motherhood by men who see no value in women. That is why French feminists adamantly opposed same-sex marriage, while approving legislation for civil unions. Same-sex marriage is still not legal in France, and that is because of French feminists—what do they know that American feminists refuse to see?
The Bible says we are not to lead the children of God astray, Mr. Beck. And this is where we come to the second point: Mr. Beck, you are a Christian and are a member of a Christian religion. This particular religion, Mr. Beck, preaches that God is not an old bachelor, but rather a married man and woman. Your religion, Mr. Beck, was on the frontlines of the Proposition 8 battle in California and took the hit from that courageous stance. Where, Mr. Beck, is your courage and your conviction? Do you believe that our young people will find happiness by flouting God’s design of equal partnership between the two halves of humanity in marriage? When their friends ask them in the brave new world that is surely coming to US culture, “do you think you’ll grow up to marry a man or a woman?,” or when Disney creates its first “princess-princess” or “prince-prince” love story, will you say, Mr. Beck, that this is no threat to our children?
Perhaps we should give Mr. Beck the benefit of the doubt, and speculate that when he urges us back to church, he means for us to hear there that same-sex marriage should be opposed. But surely he must know that once same-sex marriage is made legal, preaching that homosexuality is a sin will inevitably be made a hate crime, punishable under the criminal code. Wherever same-sex marriage has been legalized, the next legal move has been exactly that.
Maybe conservatives cannot stop same-sex marriage. In that case, it behooves conservatives to fight hard in every state for the unfettered right to homeschool one’s children, so that parents can teach their children why same-sex marriage is wrong. But RSFs do not believe the fight is over yet. Same-sex marriage has been explicitly ruled illegal in over 30 states. Why, then, is Mr. Beck willing to throw in the towel, and discourage other conservatives from fighting for a heterosexual definition of marriage at this critical moment where hearts and minds are in flux?
This is one issue on which it is very plain why the voice of Red State Feminists and the mama grizzlies is so important to the conservative movement. Male conservative pundits may simply never get it—which is why a vibrant Red State Feminism is so crucial to the movement. Thank God for the mama grizzlies like Sarah Palin! Ladies, don’t let the men of our movement cavalierly dismiss what we know is one of the most profoundly important issues for women and children at this moment in American history. On this issue, Glenn Beck should be paying attention to Sarah Palin–and this goes to show that no human collective or movement can succeed without an equal voice and equal say for both halves of humanity. Red State Feminists everywhere, write in to Glenn Beck and tell him that while you love him, he needs to listen to the women of the conservative movement and change his mind on same-sex marriage! Tell him it isn’t about his leg or his pocket, that it’s about the kids. Even Thomas Jefferson would understand that, Mr. Beck.
by Red State Gal
images: DBKP file; Box Turtle Bullentin
source: Mr. Beck, On Same-Sex Marriage You Are Wrong
So let me get this right. The big reason to be against same sex marriage is that it will some how prevent kids from being gay. That didn’t work out so well for the 30 million mothers who currently have gay children. Blocking same sex marriage isn’t going to magically turn gays straight. Let’s be honest making marriage availible to the LGBT community really won’t stop them from living together and raising children. It’s going to happen no matter what the marriage laws are. Taught in schools? What is preventing sexual orientation from being taught there now? Christianity? Only 70% of Americans think of themselves as Christian and Hindus and Buddists have very different veiws on sexuality. It’s time for conservatives to put thier energy where they have a chance of winning, and a chance to actually make a difference.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 09:12
Eric,
Do you always argue ad reductio absurdum?
Only 70% of Americans are Christians?
What’s your point?
It’s about what a large majority of people feel is wrong vs. what a minority is demanding.
Are you arguing that 70% of Americans should just keep their mouths shut while a small cabal of judges and activists shove something else down their throats over their wishes?
I think people have gotten a bellyful of that the last 19 months.
Sorry.
It’s like my teen-age daughter going out drinking: she might do it occasionally; I might suspect she does it occasionally; but I’m not going to give her the car keys and a bottle of Wild Turkey and say “Here kid, knock yourself out.”
Whatever 2 people do in the privacy of their own homes is their business.
Don’t ask me to celebrate it–or keep my mouth shut.
“Everybody get in line and be quiet.”
One nation, under grade school…
Thanks for taking the time to stop and leave your comment.
Reply
Eric Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 12:12
I think the term you are looking for is “reductio ad absurdum”. Please correct me if I am wrong. What I was trying to say you can’t force Christian morals (which presumably 70% follow- although in reality that seems to be high) on the minority (30%). It is not the governments place to enforce religious morals. Let’s leave that to the theocracies of the world, Vatican City, Iran, and Nepal for example.
Also, the LGBT community doesn’t seem to be inviting you to their ceremonies, so you don’t need to be worried about celebrating it. If they do, you can always politely decline and state that it goes against your personal beliefs.
Lastly, I’m confused about what a teenager drinking Wild Turkey with the car keys in hand has to do with two people getting married. One is potentially lethal to herself and others, while the other is a private contract between two consenting people and their government.
Reply
Keeley Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 12:33
It’s also important to note that while 70% of Americans profess their religion to fall under the broad blanket of Christianity, there are sects of Chirstianity, (in particular, the United church) that do perform homosexual marriages. So the proportion of people in the US who oppose gay marriage is clearly not direclty linked to the proportion that identify as Christians.
I empathize with your fear that legalizaiton of gay marriages will make it illegal to preach that homosexual behaviour is a sin. I hope its a mis-placed fear, and like to believe it is, since it is still legal to preach that abortions and divorces are wrong, despite their legal status. YOu shouldn’t conflate the two chagne sin legislation – one frequently follows the other, I admit, but that’s not a good reason to condemn homosexual marriages, as that law is not the one that treads on your personal religious beliefs.
Reply
MickeyC Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 13:53
Again more nonsense about same sex marriage based on ignorance and prejudice. Same sex marriage has already disproven all of the idiocy claimed by the right wing nuts. Fact is, marriage is a civil contract and as such should be available to all regardless of sexual orientation or gender. While all of the self proclaimed “grizzlies” maybe having hissy fits over same sex marriage, all they do is look sillier and sillier. Sorry, no one takes these women seriously and no one should. McCain learned first hand what these “grizzlies” can do to your political career and now he and his running mate are just bad cocktail party jokes today. Same sex marriage is here to stay and, as has been said many times before, if you don’t approve of same sex marriage, don’t have one.
Reply
And where in the Bible does it say its ok to be a feminist?
You remind me of the main character in the movie “Prayers for Bobby”.
Reply
[...] Link: Consevative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage – DBKP – Death By 1000 Papercuts [...]
“cabal of judges”
This right here makes you sound extraordinarily unreasonable. Essentially everything you say can easily be refuted, but it would be like talking to a wall. Absolutely absurd.
Same-sex couples having children is saying the children have no right to have a mother? Guess what, having a mother and/or father is not a right. It is not anything that can be guaranteed, and is irrational for the gov’t to take the position of requiring.
You are profoundly lacking in even the most basic logic.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:12
adam,
Essentially everything you say can easily be refuted, but it would be like talking to a wall.
Essentially, everything I say can be so easily refuted you’ll pass on the effort.
You are profoundly lacking in even the most basic logic.
Well, the argument doesn’t boil down to logic: it’s one of beliefs basically. However, if you’re interested in logic, why attempt to refute 6000 years of civilization’s logic of the proper form for a stable family?
Indeed, “cabal of judges.” That’s the only way same-sex marriage has made any headway. It’s been defeated every time it’s been voted on by the populace. But then the argument will become “Do what’s right, not what’s popular.”
In which case, it’s what each of us believe what is right. Obviously we have a clash of beliefs, in which case logic is not so useful, is it now?
Be that as it may, thanks for the comment.
Reply
otsenre Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 01:25
oh yes, because the past 6000 years have been such a highlight in terms of logic.
slavery, racism, dictatorships, genocide, etc.
Reply
Dan_Doe Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 10:05
“Well, the argument doesn’t boil down to logic: it’s one of beliefs basically.”
LOL… Admin. really???? Arguments are NOT based on logic? Sorry, I think I just heard Socrates role over in his grave.
However, if you SERIOUSLY want to use “6000 years of civilization’s logic…” as your point for this argument, Then keep in mind that:
- For 4,000 of those 6,000 years the vast majority of advanced civilizations were Pegans (believing in more than one god, having orgies and human sacrifices to honor said gods, and (yes, dare I say it) even accepted homosexual relationships as perfectly normal forms of sexuality.
- For 1,500 of those 6,000 years, advanced civilizations thought the world was flat and the sun revolved around the earth (believing otherwise could actually have your KILLED).
Of course, these points of “logic” are waisted on you, because I doubt you’ve ever picked up a history book (other than the Bible). Something tells me you’re one of those crazy right wing nuts who actually believe dinosaurs did NOT exist… in which case, no amount of “logic” I spell out for you will do any good. You are obviously to fanatical to even listen.
So, go grab your “The end is near” sandwich board, and go back to the street corner.
Reply
LBG1 Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 13:07
Dan_Doe:
“Well, the argument doesn’t boil down to logic: it’s one of beliefs basically.”
Sorry, Dan, but I have to disagree with you. (I’m LBG, from DBKP, one of the admin’s at this blog)
This issue is one of “beliefs”, in some cases, beliefs which aren’t based on logic. What has been truly interesting in these comments, the vitriol against those who oppose same sex marriage without the mention of Barack Obama and the Obama administration. The Obama administration’s Justice Dept. “beliefs” on gay marriage. The June 9, 2009, DOJ brief filed in a California court defending the Defense of Marriage Act, the DOJ calling the act, a “valid exercise of Congress’ power” that is saving taxpayers money. THE DOJ standing on the side of those who want to keep the right of marriage to hetero couples.
Based on your “logic”, the Obama administration, Department of Justice, “crazy right wing nut jobs who actually believe dinosaurs didn’t exist”.
CBS News:
August 8, 2010, Washington Post:
There you have it, the Democrat “elephant” in the room, the President’s adviser David Axelrod confirming Barack Obama oposes same-sex marriage.
Based on your logic, is Barack Obama, a “right wing nut job” who should “back to the street corner” with an “end is near sandwich board?”
As someone who believes gays should have the same rights as everyone else, the right to marry, adopt, take care of foster child, I find it interesting the guy who campaigned on the promise of an advocate of gays has so far, let his Justice Dept. filed briefs in court cases defending anti-gay marriage legislation while his advisor confirmed in August Obama DOES NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE.
Reply
This “blog” is just full of unfounded statements and opinions.
Firstly, YOU teach your kids right and wrong according to the moral or religious system you choose to adopt for your family. Gays getting married does not change that, nor does it have any bearing on what kids are “taught in school”.
Schools aren’t in the business of marriage counseling, and if they were, (and the teachings actually affected anything), we would probably have a much lower divorce rate.
Also, in states where gay marriages are legal, there has been no “decay” of traditional marriages. If you would stop being hysterical and look at empirical evidence, you would see that you are subscribing to a fear tactic that has no basis in reality.
Lastly, (and get this through your head)- Gay is not “learned”. Gays have been raised by straight families, in many cases Christian households. The entire current gay population is the product of your nostalgic view of America. Stop pretending you can ignore things you don’t like and they will go away.
Thankfully, my “momma grizzly” is NOTHING like you. My momma grizzly (like many good mothers) will fight for her babies and defend them NO MATTER WHAT. She loves her kids (just how they are), and will fight tooth and nail for their happiness.
How “grizzly” would you be if your child was gay? Stop being a hypocrite, fight for the happiness of all our sons and daughters. Would you love your child less or fight less if they were gay? How sad. You aren’t a “momma grizzly” you are a “partisan grizzly”.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:12
ApolloGenX,
This “blog” is just full of unfounded statements and opinions.
As is your comment.
But thanks for leaving it anyway.
Reply
ApolloGenX Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:22
So, rather than explaining why my assertion that states allowing gay marriages are an empirical example of evidence that proves you are wrong, you offer a one liner response?
Instead of thinking about how a true mother (and the only woman I would EVER consider children with) puts her children FIRST, you offer a glib retort?
Instead of discussing the role that schools currently play vs the false role that you describe, you simply ignore what you don’t want to think about?
Thank you. Your response has been enlightening and characteristic of your position. You offer no critical thinking, no constructive discussion, no facts or other empirical evidence. You offer nothing but the regurgitated propaganda handed to you.
-Oh and as far as your 6000 years of human civilization comment. While sex as a method of procreation could certainly fall under that specious argument- Marriage, which was invented, not at the dawn of man, has changed drastically over even the last couple of centuries. So you might want to revisit that opinion. Tradition does not make something right. The very idea is Anti-American, whose inception was revolution.
Reply
ANTHONY Riordan Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 08:18
It is not about tradition, it is not about the dawn of man and it is not about keeping your children happy! All rights should be the same no matter what your sexual desire and children should be raised to respect the decisions and moral beliefs of their neighbor. The Definition of Marriage is between a man and women. The point of Family and Marriage is for Pro-creation and a belief that family is the core of the community and state. The breakdown of the family, the breakdown of the community and the breakdown of the state is proven to be from the deterioration of morality, lack of a belief system that creates a community making good decisions for the youth and encouraging a favorable environment for a better safer productive future for all man kind. Gays and Lesbians have the right to receive all the same rights and many i work and live with have personal lives that do not effect the community or state and that should not be questioned but, the defined term Marriage is the only thing now being fought for. The first argument was to gain the equal rights which after being given they were not satisfied because they want the term Marriage to be re-defined… That shows and proves that the true fight for those behind the scenes is to break down the family structure and communities and use the gay issue hi-jacking what gays did want in order to take more and more and to put the equal rights on the back burner in order to take something that actually means nothing to the gay community. Marriage does not mean same sex union and it can’t, if it is about rights, then take the rights, keep your personal desires at home and live. Our personal lives are personal and if it is about equal rights then do as I recommended and was accepted by many including my gay friends and daughter, create a defined definition of the union and make it yours, make it reflect your values and celebrate your values because your values are different no matter what you try to make it out to be. I am not religious but if you and the other 30 million gays around our country and from around the world can’t see that Division and lack of consistency in our family’s are the cause for our country’s demise! Personal issues being used to create Special rights and special laws based on Race or other issues will create division not bring people together. When all are given equal rights by law and personal decisions, sex, your home life is left at home where it belongs, then we all live and work together. When you give special rights you give the radicals a stage on both sides. When you feel sexual orientation needs taught in school or regular sex is taught in school you create interest not natural process’s. When you teach about drugs you create interest in teenagers. When you allow parents and kids to keep their personal lives personal they are less likely to take chances and put themselves into situations that allow pressure to dictate instead of the family and community. We as a nation were placed under attack in the 20′s and again heavily in the 60′s by groups that listed the issues today being put in front of each of us. HOW do we destroy America? We must destroy the family! How? We must remove morality, we must put the minority personal beliefs ahead of the family and community. We must remove the belief that family’s are the core and push it into the school or state system which will allow for the few to control the many. Once the system was in place and sex, personal choice and personal beliefs were put into the main stream, the young can easily be reached, the schools can begin to teach and demand a new way of belief. Right or wrong, any special rights, any special laws divide and break down society and civilization over time. I have no ill will or negative beliefs of anyone accept those whom believe they deserve the right to change my life to benefit their choice of life. When chemical companies and pharma companies also start using hormones and chemicals to literally change humanity with Eugenics which is a scientific fact to why children are becoming “physically” sexually active younger and younger. Which this also means their primordial instincts and survival instincts begin to control rational thought which once that happens, suggestive actions become actual action and experience becomes part of their lives at an age which they can’t process without compromise! These children having never even built a solid value base to their lives become easy prey for those interested in experimenting what they are seeing on MTV and movies and again anyone that says this is not fact is ignorant or prefer this type of access to our children before they can make value based decisions instead of emotional ad physically reactive decisions. You are using children to further a personal agenda in our schools if you believe teaching any-type of sex is OK before 16 if not 18 in schools. When 12 year olds are taught about Gay sex or normal sex, they are both wrong. When a 16 year old begins to look for another gay female and 13 year old girls still with no clue of life experiment, that does not make them gay, it just makes them vulnerable and still stupid because they have used pleasure over mind before they are ready. Schools are trapping based on an education agenda put into our schools to change what is not a normal human development. If you believe that two men having sex is how your body was created or evolved, then you also believe man and animal is ok. I again have no problem with personal choice or living your personal life with anyone or thing and I have friends and family that are gay but marriage is about family and pro-creation and that is my choice to teach not yours and pushing for laws is asking for future destruction of the family. IF you or anyone believes this is normal then you are also the reason all discussion of SEX, Gays, anything other than the family’s decision on how to raise a child must be the base and then we are about to see the tipping point as we swing left and right in society and once this tipping point is reached and millions demand the right to take control, it is those whom pushed for special rights and the dismantlement of the family whom will either leave most cities looking to secure a future for America on a bus or by military removal and shipped to California’s new Gay state or end up hiding again. I do not want the backlash but reasonable allowance of time to pass and allow for natural acceptance of all changes instead of pushing to accept your personal choice just because most want to shove their belief in the face of others instead of living side by side. According to Greece, Rome and other societies which all lived side by side before the age of monotheism with marriage being between a man and women, with Gays being part of society as well as lesbians as was sex with young men and animals. The definition of marriage has always remained the same for obvious reasons. The life style of the majority of gays has also always remained the same and since the 80′s the life of gay men has been allowed with good reason to become part of main stream America with the approval of most Americans yet no matter how far all races, sexes or aliens have come, the demand for more now without continued allowance of natural processes to take place is a huge mistake. Lets all have equal rights and keep our personal lives personal and if you don’t, then you are creating the issues….
Reply
Even the Real Housewives of New Jersey know that gay marriage isn’t a family issue, it’s a fear issue:
http://bit.ly/aTOm6Q
Reply
“It’s about what a large majority of people feel is wrong vs. what a minority is demanding.”
American jurisprudence, and history, is full of examples where the enormous majority called for a clear moral wrong, citing their religious beliefs as the base. The trial judge that now–rightly–makes people cringe, in Loving v. Virginia, stated, for example:
“Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races show that he did not intend for the races to mix.”
Opposing secular, civil same-sex marriage makes no sense under a Christian mindset and ESPECIALLY under a conservative mindset. Christ did not force people to live as he did; he lived by example and preached understanding of others. He did not petition the Romans to enforce his beliefs, or to prevent other groups from practicing different beliefs. Which is exactly what people like you are trying to do.
It makes *absolutely* no sense under a conservative philosophy, as conservatives believe in MINIMAL GOVERNMENT. The government being deeply entangled in people’s personal lives, defining their personal relationships and the legal commitments they can enter, based on other people’s religious objections to such, is about as far from a conservative philosophy as you could POSSIBLY be. You are not a conservative–at least, not in social matters.
You’re arguing for a Christian theocracy and claiming you’re a “conservative.” No thanks. Sorry.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 15:29
Libertarian,
One of the reasons the Libertarian Party never does better at the ballot box is that its rare to find Libertarians willing to stand for any principle other than the principle of not standing for anything seriously.
Arguing against gay marriage is to argue for “Christian theocracy?”
Really?
It’s why I’m a conservative-libertarian. Whenever I get into discussions with my “pure” Libertarian friends, they are all about posing questions to determine how pure a libertarian I am.
Am I against he draft? Yes, in about 95% of the situations–but because I would support such a move in an all-out war, I’m not a “true libertarian.” Fair enough.
I’m hands-off in 95% of the church-state issues–but because I see the value in some American traditions, I have to be lectured by those such as yourself as pimping for “theocracy.”
But thanks for the comment; it gives me an opportunity to say that there’s a SLEW of good comments here, I’d love to have the time to answer them all, since 1-the author of the piece isn’t here to defend herself and 2-good comments deserve answers (but a well thought-out comment is its own reward, so it’s not completely necessary).
BUT if I did, some days, such as this article, nothing else would get done and I’m already behind.
So thanks everyone for your great discussion. Maybe I’ll get back later this evening to answer a few. If I don’t, ApolloGenX said something earlier that was true: most comments deserve a better answer than a one-liner–which is all I’ve the time right now for. And this put me further behind.
Thanks all for taking your time to leave a comment.
Reply
Kevin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 17:27
How will history books judge you gay marriage opponents ? What will future generations think when gay marriage will be legal in all 50 states ?
Reply
YOUR A STUPID BITCH!!! GAY MARRIAGE IS HERE TO STAY!! WE ARE NOT GOING AWAY AND WE WILL WIN IN THE END!!!!
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:34
Anthony,
Thank you.
You just boiled down your argument into a form to make it easy enough for everyone on both sides to understand.
Reply
ApolloGenX Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:36
There’s no reason to name call. The author undoubtedly believes in what she is saying, and the only way to educate her is to either put forth logical viewpoints (which might be largely ignored due to a lack of rational thought)… or to live by example.
Jesus taught us this, Ghandi taught this, and Martin Luther King taught us this. The only way to break down barriers of ignorance and prejudice is by the demonstration of example and faith in the righteousness of our cause. Right will prevail, and justice will prevail. Attacking and hateful comments can lead to no beneficial end. These are the tools that the ignorant use against us.
I firmly believe that the equal rights movement is based on mutual respect, understanding, and love. To that end, we must use those ideals as our weapons to fight the bigotry, ignorance, and hate that is fueling the opposition. I am a Christian, and I believe that Jesus’ true teachings will always prevail. It is a battle against false prophets and one that we will win.
Reply
ANTHONY Riordan Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 09:51
I agree with you but we are almost out of time. If people can’t start seeing that both sides are fixing the game to sway us back and forth, create fear and excitement creates the ability to be controlled. The use of Propaganda is alive and well. The use of deception against the American People is real. The use of Fascism, Communism and Socialism is being applied to break down and create a new system. (COMMUNITARIANISM) IF people that are reading and commenting are not willing to actually research and see the truth when everything in the world is right in front of us on line for the time being, then we are lost because the other 80% won’t even go that far. War was waged in 1962 against the family, middle class and its blue prints have been too the T! The groups like Club of Rome, Tri-Lats etc.. all work as large world governments and have created what we think is reality and that conspiracy’s do not exist. We are not in a Conspiracy we are in a take over step, by step. Its all documented and they do not even care anymore when its pointed out because they control the message coming from Media. When 60% of Americans still do not know that Building 7 Fell at 5pm on 911 and refuse to ask questions as to how or even if it happened, we are already lost and the only fight left will be to save the community you live in and your direct family.
Reply
ANTHONY Riordan Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 09:04
The response about Marriage being here to stay is exactly what will create the problem, is it about rights or about taking a word and re-defining it? I thought it was about equal rights? If it is then the word marriage being removed from the dictionary and from use by a man and women makes this about proving a point that the destruction of family, community and structure is more important to you than having the rights that have been allowed by many states and most americans as equality. Almost all Americans that have sided with Gays that they deserve the same rights in some type of union as defined by their belief system now is no longer enough. They want the world to change to satisfy and justify their personal life. My personal life is personal and if the majority pulled together and pushed their desires and beliefs on all Americans life would change for many Americans immediately and for the self serving looking for special rights would not fair well. Your argument is what all my gay friends and family members fear, you control the message and not the actual intent of equal rights. Your message could derail the hard work of those that believe in equal rights because as the tipping point is reached and those tired of fighting to save our family’s and destruction of morality and community now having to listen to 8 year old stories of gay family’s in school which has no right in school. When you want to use propaganda to change a mind you fill the head of an 8 year old with no parent around, when you want to destroy a country you first must remove the family structure and middle class. Our country is being Hijacked and arguments like marriage is more important than equal rights is a planted fight against America and using a group that will yell, kick and scream has worked out perfectly for those looking to change and destroy America, so congratulations for being the avenue for Anti Americans. The groups wanting America destroyed in the 1920′s were set up to target the family like planned parenthoods marxist Eugenics beginnings in the 1920′s was about destroying America through the family yet is celebrated as a good cause. Learn history and understand what your actually fighting for instead of pushing your personal issues onto a country. Wake up, this fight is no longer about rights but destroying this country. Be careful your ignorance does not destroy the same reason your able to fight for your rights at the moment. The powers that BE love the ignorance of individual personal rights being made to be society’s rights and therefore taught in schools. Great, lets teach an 8 year old that anytype of SEX should be in the head of a child before the parent decides the direction of a belief system or is it true that the state does now control our family message and it is the rights of the state to tell a parent what is right and wrong about belief. The state is loving being pushed to take control of the family because once they do have full control they will turn their power against the same idiots that gave them the right to new power. If you do not believe the Eugenics people do not want a society of small manageable family’s with personal lives being personal not creating laws, you will be the first casualty when they decide to take full control.
Reply
Isn’t ‘conservative feminist’ an oxymoron?
We demand old white guys get to decide what we do with our bodies! Girls are meant to bake cookies! WE LIKE TO STAY IN THE KITCHEN!
Ahahahaha
Reply
Americans need to wake up the fact that Beck is simply another opinion pushing charlatan who is a product of mormon cult theology and he mixes this with his personal make up as a dry alcoholic. On his radio show and Fox Network program he consistent demonstrates all the unstable behaviors of a dry alcoholic which include grandiosity, judgmentalism, intolerance, impulsivity, ADD and indecisiveness. Alongside that reality, Glenn Beck does not possess a single ounce of journalistic integrity, has no college degree, has no qualifications and he is definitely not a true conservative. But then, what can anyone expect from someone who can’t find anything filthier than their own personal reflection. Since people like Beck cannot survive on the basis of any personal merits, they survive by putting others down with lies and half truths in order to feel good about themselves. The truth about Beck is that he a dry mormon alcoholic who never got the counseling required for alcoholics. To further complicate things and confuse people, Beck flippantly throws around Christian terms like “God”, “Jesus”,”Holy Spirit” as well as voices of other so called “Spirit Powers” on his radio talk show. Beck is a mormon in active standing with the mormon church and is not a Christian. Mormonism teaches many gods, that the god of the earth was once a man who attained godhood status, there is no trinity, the cross of Christ means nothing and that Jesus Christ and Satan were brothers. Because Beck does not possess a single ounce of journalistic integrity, he is the perfect abortion poster child for Fox Network. The people who love what Beck says are no different than the impressionable sheep who loved every speech made by Adolph Hitler in his early years when he brought Germany into an era of economic prosperity These same sheep also blindly followed Hitler into one of the darkest chapters of world history. Beck and the Fox Network both cater to the same lowest common denominator of demagoguery. Beck would not know the first thing about God as he is a mormon. Someone should ask him which of the many mormon gods he kept talking about during his argument with himself on Saturday on the square in DC. Like a typical dry alcoholic, Beck even lied on national television when he spoke about holding a document signed by George Washington. That event never took Place. Unfortunately, people who love being led around by the nose do not realize that Beck is talking about a different god than that of Christianity, Judaism or Islam and that he has been a product of mormonism cultism from the day he started doing a radio talk show as an opinion pusher. You don’t have to have a degree in psychology to see that he exhibits all the signs of a dry alcoholic. The only reason this unstable impressionable idiot fell into mormonism was because the woman he wanted to have sex with would not do so unless they got first got married and from that point, they joined the mormon cult. Glenn Beck is as big a charlatan as Josephs Smith or that 5th grade graduate (Charles T Russell) who started the Jehovah’s Witness cult. This is Glenn Beck in a very accurate & concise nutshell. Considering the fact that Becks personal views are extreme Marxist Libertarian, his form of patriotism is false and he is a person who has no real substance or depth. It will not surprise many of us when Beck’s next big thing is to come out of the closet and announce his homosexuality to the nation. Simply put…he is just another predatory neocon who is pushing the buttons of very ignorant & impressionable people who love being told what to think and believe. We live in a period of history where it has become socially acceptable to be stupid and follow extremist idiots like Glenn Beck, Adolph Hitler, Sarah Palin, Karl Rove, Dick Cheney, Rush Limbaugh which is part of why it is hard to get decent people elected to office. When American voters choose ignorance over truth and believe the lies of these kinds of people, the election process becomes the equivalent of trying to tune a piano that is missing half its keys.
Reply
Libertarian Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 10:46
Wall of Text alert. Paragraph breaks are your friend.
Reply
ANTHONY Riordan Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 09:22
Wow, I really thought I was about to read substance but even though I agree with some of your concerns about the actual message of Beck and others, you have missed the point of what he does cover, he points out each person he attacks with their own words not his opinion. He is not what I believe to be a leader and he is not a Neo-con. He has pointed out the actual people in their own words how they want to destroy America. I also point out that the Right wing also have been working to destroy America just as fast. Your comments point to the Rightwing being wrong and the left wing being right yet if you have not woken up that they are both accomplishing the same goals with the acception of a few issues that control the people then your still asleep, your still focused in the issues they want you to focus on instead of actually researching the truth. Obama and the Left want nothing to do with old America and the Right wants nothing to do with Old America so when both party’s are destroying our country and they use idiots like you that actually believe their is a left and right you play into exactly what they are doing, controlling you. The best thing that Beck has been able to do is expose the truth of the people behind the administration but Beck has refused to show clearly the actual people calling the shots and how they are the root of our country’s true problems. If you start back in the 1860′s and research every government through Bush you will see the path. You will see the Fascism of the Right with the Corporations, you will see the Socialism of the Left through the insurance corporate power and on both sides you will see they have the exact same goal, control. We are seeing Communitarianism which is a communist, Socialist, fascist system that has taken the economic control of capitalism, the social control of socialism and we are seeing more and more government control or attempt to create issues that will bring the FCC into controling the media and internet. Your comments are the ignorant comments because they are playing into the governments game. Beck actually believes in what he is doing but he is being used and as his messages have changed because he is being pushed in a direction, he is going to become dangerous just as Obama’s appeal was used by these same people to control the left and in both instances it equals, Lie’s, loss of liberty and preparation for the downfall of America and the beginning of a new system which is being built all around us every day and has been since 1991. One of the first moves in the 90′s was allowing Police to monitor Insurance company sales to people. I wish I could have a company and get the police to check and see if every car on the road bought my product even though it is a fact that 99.46% of every million cars on the road do not need insurance yet it is said to protect us. Now the left will mandate health insurance be purchased or you will be fined even though again it is a product being sold and the IRS is going to police this, and this is done by the left even though it was sold to help you. Look up the template created by Romney in Massachusetts and research what happens when you don’t get insurance. A man was arrested in May for refusing to buy insurance or pay a fine. That is fascism. The right goes to war against countries, the left goes to war against Americans and both hid and lie getting their base to carry out these lie’s then they get screwed and we swing back the other way for a time. IT is a Rigged Game. Wake up!!
Reply
Well, Beck is simply a political “entertainer”… he is not a journalist.
Like Ann Coulter, he is not an authority on anything, he simply entertains and many ignorant viewers confuse his dialog with facts or truth.
He simply tells stories, many of which are factually incorrect, and misleading. He plays to his audience, and sells his books or other products. He sells nostalgia to an aging baby boomer population and packages it as patriotism.
I have no problem with this. He is a snake oil salesman and if he didn’t someone else would. There is an aging population that has too much time and too little perspective. Someone will fill that role. I am happy, however that he has chosen not to pander to the hateful crowd as his target audience.
Reply
Oh, not this tired old song again. It’s like she has no idea that gay marriage is a complete and utter inevitability. It’s cute, really. I guess you better round ‘em up and head for the hills, huh?
Reply
I do have to wonder- Once gay marriage is legalized… who will be the next target? Muslims? There is always some minority group that is being targeted as the next “downfall of society”.
Has the lucky group been announced yet?
Reply
A comment followed by questions:
1. When you misspell the word “conservative” as “consevative” in your headline, you invite readers to question if there might be other errors in your post.
2. In defending your position, you note that France has civil unions but not same-sex marriage. Does this mean you support civil unions/domestic partnerships for same-sex couples, as in France?
3. Are you aware that recent major public opinion polls in France (Credoc poll July 2010, BVA poll Nov. 2009, Ifop poll June 2008) find that 60-70% of French now support same-sex marriage? Does this mean that the will of the French people is being thwarted by a “cabal of judges and activists”, and do you think that they should respect the will of the French people by allowing same-sex marriage, then?
4. Your argument seems to rest on the belief that allowing same-sex marriage will result in a generation of children who are confused about whether they might marry a man or a woman. This would seem to imply that you believe that sexual orientation is a choice or learned behavior, lacking any innate biological/genetic basis. Is this what you believe?
5. In regard to this issue being “about the children”: what about gay children? if you had a child who, despite being unexposed to gay people and being told that gay marriage was wrong their whole life, nonetheless turned out to be gay and came out to you as gay during their teens or twenties, what would you want for that child? A life lived alone? A life of self-hatred and inferiority?
5. What do you think of Christians and Christian churches which bless same-sex unions, and teach that God’s plan may not be the same for every person? That God’s plan might be different for some of us? Do you view such denominations as heretical?
6. Given that a handful of religious groups do allow same-sex marriage, and that we allow freedom of religion in this country, isn’t prohibiting gay marriage a violation of such denominations’ freedom of worship rights?
7. If different religious traditions have different approaches to gay marriage (though the vast majority do NOT condone same-sex marriage, to be sure), how is the state to choose between which definition to endorse, given that our secular/civil laws are not to endorse the view of any one religion over another? Popular opinion? Does this not violate the spirit in democracy against the “Tyranny of the Majority”, as per John Stuart Mill’s classic text, On Liberty?
8. A final heartfelt note: I am a gay man in a committed, monogamous relationship. My partner and I live in a quiet suburb, and do not do drugs or live the “gay party lifestyle”. I am the son of an evangelical preacher, and my sister is a conservative feminist who is training to be a pastor. I was taught from childhood very traditional notions of right and wrong, and tried very, very hard to be what I knew, from age 4, I was not. I was never confused. No one abused me, converted me, recruited me, or taught me to be gay. I knew I was gay, and I was taught to hate myself by people who worried that children might be “confused” about “God’s plan” for them.
I wonder if you know how hard it is for gay couples to achieve any type of stability and security in their relationship without legal recognition and rights, protections, and benefits from the government. Do you know any same-sex couples?
As for my own beliefs: I believe that “marriage” should be a term reserved for religions to determine as they see fit, and that the state, for legal benefits/rights, should be out of the “marriage” business and instead in the “civil union” business.
Reply
Dan_Doe Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 10:21
There’s no point, JSS. The author of this blog has ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST in facts or logic… just “belief.”
Isn’t that right, admin? It’s what you keep saying in ALL your rebutals. Screw the “facts” and the “logic.” The “bible” says it, therefore it is real.
Reply
This essay will one day be shown to future American citizens. As an example of the type of human being to avoid becoming at all costs.
That the writer of this essay has the audacity to even publish it says so very, very much about them.
What an immoral, disrespectful piece of garbage. Your animus is showing, proudly, before your god and your country.
What a shameful, shameful thing to write. But your lack of shame in doing so most certainly prevents you from saying anything at all about love, morality or honor.
Reply
It’s kind of funny, though, that she thinks a gay citizen would care one bit if she ‘celebrated’ our relationships or not.
This woman clearly thinks she is superior to a gay citizen.
I mostly feel great, great sorrow for her, bless her heart. : (
Reply
History will certainly look at this perspective as an ignorant and most likely hateful position to take.
I find it rather interesting looking over the responses that there don’t seem to be many supporters of this particular perspective.
I wonder why? I wonder if it is because the anti-gay movement has grown tiresome or if it is because many of the anti-gay males are also not so hot on the idea of feminism?
Reply
I agree with the grizzly woman who wrote this article on one point: Gay marriage is unquestionably about children. And while no one has the legal right to a mother and a father, children do have the right to to the protection of their parents when their parents agree to accept such responsibility. However, when parents are unable to marry, the child has the protection of only one parent. If that parent dies or becomes incapacitated, the child is as much a ward of the State as it is of its own mother or father. As much as we’d all like children to have mothers and fathers (I guess), in that situation anyone could agree it’s better for the child to be with its only remaining parent than with the State.
Reply
“I find it rather interesting looking over the responses that there don’t seem to be many supporters of this particular perspective.
I wonder why? I wonder if it is because the anti-gay movement has grown tiresome or if it is because many of the anti-gay males are also not so hot on the idea of feminism?”
Don’t be silly! This is “conservative feminism”, which is mentioned multiple times in the bible. No true and righteous heterosexual male could possibly take umbrage with her god given rights. They are clearly just to busy picketing funerals to make their rounds today. God bless!
Reply
I don’t think anyone disputes that it is preferable for a child to have a parent, rather than be a ward of the state.
I do wonder, however why anyone would think it preferable for a child to remain a ward of the state over going to one or two gay loving parents?
I can only imagine the luxury of that opinion is enjoyed by those who have never been in the “system”. I can’t imagine a loving home with two fathers or mothers being worse than living in the “system” bouncing from one questionable foster home to another.
In one sentence advocates against gay marriage espouse the ideals of home, family, and stability- while in the next would blithely condemn foster children to a restless unstable and in many cases, dangerous life in the foster system. Unimaginable!
Reply
LBG1 Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 15:11
ApolloGenx:
Excellent observation!
A number of years ago I happened to hear one of Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s radio shows. During her show “Dr. Laura” told a single mom she shouldn’t be allowed to raise her child because she was “single” that the woman’s child should have “two parents”, that the single mom should give up her child!!! The single mom, in tears, me, horrified at Dr. Laura’s ‘advice’. For all those anti-gay marriage advocates who, as you pointed out, “espouse the ideals of home, family, and stability”, the statistics from the CDC in 2008 state:
Marriage rate: 7.1 per 1,000 total population
Divorce rate: 3.5 per 1,000 total population
What these figures reveal: The divorce rate, almost half of the marriage rate. So much for the “stability” of heterosexual marriages.
Each and every child deserves a loving home whether the child is raised by a single parent, a hetero, or a gay couple. Gay couples, the right to marry. Anti-gay marriage advocates, hypocrites in regards to the millions of children, wards of the state in foster care.
Reply
I’m not really seeing why the state should have an interest in mandating gender roles. Aside from breast feeding and giving birth, there is nothing a mother can do that a father can’t do and nothing a father can do that a mother can’t do. The latest 30 years of research indicates that same sex parents can raise children just as well as opposite sex parents, so if you genuinely care about children then you should support same sex marriage.
Reply
Hey foolish writer:
Most gays in America are Christians.
Most gays came from heterosexual parents.
Most of the parents of gay kids are Christians, too.
And many Christians love and support the gay people they know regardless of what a tiny handful of sentences in the bible may or may not mean.
Do not think that “Christian” means only what you think it means.
Do not assume that “family” configurations only consist of father, mother, and their biological offspring.
Do not assume that calling yourself “consevative” (sic) or “feminist” means you possess some kind of all-encompassing point of view. After reading this column, I would think the pair together forms a new meaning: “big dummy.”
Your world view and your needs are yours alone. Do not try to impose it on other responsible adults and their needs. Do not try to claim Christianity for yourself.
YOU ARE A FOOL.
Reply
You sound concerned that your children won’t live in an intolerable state of overpopulation, or something.
There are plenty of children being born, and who is it hurting if a kid is gay? Exposed or not (to your prince-prince Disney stories, etc. which would probably only serve to teach tolerance and harmony), children will grow up to be THEMSELVES.
Sounds to me like you’re a tad scared…
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 17:36
Lindsay,
There is a distinct difference between tolerance and approval. Don’t confuse the two. And don’t flatter yourself that every idea you hold is so powerful that it inspires nothing but “fear” in those who disagree.
Thanks for the comment.
Reply
One day all you people will burn in hell. I won’t even try to convince anyone Jesus Christ prophecied it in the bible.
We are getting into a world which what was right is wrong and what was wrong is right.
Yes I agree it is hard for a Homosexual to just stop been one, but not because they are born like that. Rather as a homosexual you are possessed with a demon.
You can’t not be free of this demon without first agreeing that you have a problem. Then you repent and pray that God takes it away.
How can a Homosexual be a christian. A christian = Christ-like.
Jesus Christ said if you love me, keep my ocmmandments.
Those who he has called will he save and change from that behavior.
Samuel N
Reply
otsenre Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 01:43
the bible also says you can’t eat shellfish.
have you EVER eaten shellfish?
Also, sex out of marriage is wrong according to the bible, but no one seems to care about that…
Reply
I don’t think that my idea inspires fear in you, it seems to me that homosexuality itself does the job. You’re right about the tolerance vs. acceptance, thank you for the correction. I guess being “tolerated” is just not what the fight for equality is about. It is acceptance.
What frustrates me with this article on the whole is that you are bashing gay parenting on the whole, while many gay couples have lovingly adopted and provided caring homes for less fortunate children. Would you rather these kids grow up in the foster system, a shelter, or on the street? I think it is not so much about the gender-based composition of the relationship as it is about the quantity and quality of care provided to the children.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 17:59
Lindsay,
I’m not the author of the article, though I agree with–not all but–many of its points.
Acceptance can never be legislated; certainly not from the bench.
It’s an issue that doesn’t turn on logic, but beliefs. The fact that a relatively small number of people feel passionately about it and are vocal doesn’t change the fact that an even greater number of people feel just as passionately about it–but perhaps aren’t as vocal. If attitudes change, so be it–but we’re a long way from that day.
What gay marriage proponents are demanding is immediate acceptance–tolerance is not good enough for them. I, myself, FOR YEARS, have been demanding unconditional acceptance of cigar-smoking, back-slapping somewhat out-of-shape males into the highest circles of society.
I’m disappointed it hasn’t happened. But, I don’t think my opponents on the issue fear me; nor, do I believe that they are morally wrong. We just disagree.
Thanks for the comment.
Reply
Randy Baden Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 09:49
We want acceptance, so that we can get legislation that ensures justice. Lacking acceptance, we still fight for justice.
Once we have justice, I don’t give a hoot what some stranger thinks of my lifestyle, and I will only associate with people who can accept me for who I am. There are plenty such people, and you can just go off and live your life however you want as far as I’m concerned.
Reply
I can’t believe I’m saying this, but I agree with Glenn Beck on this one. And rarely, if ever, do I agree with Glenn Beck. His quoting of Jefferson here is particularly poignant and fitting.
Believe what you want, Red State Gal; that is your right. But I cannot abide your critical attack of Neil Patrick Harris, who, in this article, you call ‘Doogie Howser’, who is a fictional character Harris played quite a number of years ago — let it go, would you? And have a little respect even if you don’t agree with his personal life. Maybe butt out while you’re at it, since it’s none of your business. And while I’m addressing it, I’d like to also call particular attention to your choice of phrasing here:
“They are saying that they are under no obligation to allow their children to have a mother, that it is all right to purposefully and premeditatedly exclude from their children’s lives the love of a mother.”
No, RSG, they are not. I implore you to step back from your computer and your own narrow viewpoint for just a moment and look at the situation from the point of view of Neil Patrick Harris and David Burtka (those are the names; use them, for pity’s sake!). I realize this may be difficult since you aren’t a gay man, and are clearly standing by your archaic prejudices, but please give it a shot.
These men love each other. They did not choose to; in much the same way men and women fall in love, Harris and Burtka found each other. They have made a life together. They are happy. They have built a relationship on, I would imagine, many of the same qualifications you look for in an equal, male partner.
So, pardon me if I do not buy for one second that Harris and Burtka are “purposefully and premeditatedly exclud[ing] from their children’s lives the love of a mother”. It is not so black and white, RSG. Just because you view it that way does not mean they do. You do not know how they think or feel; you don’t know the plans they have for their children. They may very well arrange to have some sort of female role-model in the lives of their children; you can’t possibly know their motivations or ultimate goals. These men are not attacking women by choosing to raise children together; they are merely creating their own concept of family within their own ideas of what that means. Those ideas will certainly differ from your own, but they are no less valid than your own. And they are not women-hating, sexist pigs because they love each other and want children of their own.
There are many children in this world who have only one parent. There are many children who have no parents at all. There are, indeed, many children have two parents – a mother and a father, both of whom can be unsuitable and lousy ones. And while all of these situations do not follow the ideal precedent you’re putting out there as Absolute Moral Law, they still exist. It is only when speaking of the possibility of homosexual parents that conservatives like yourself get up-in-arms and write erroneous articles about ‘thinking of the children’ and ‘focusing on the family’, no matter how rigid and old-fashioned and bigoted these statements are. Heterosexual parents are the majority. The children and teenagers in crisis are not in those situations because of their homosexual parents.
You want to help society, Red State Gal? Then how about you focus your time and energy on providing current unsuitable parents with resources for better parenting instead of wasting it on a celebrity couple who aren’t even at that point yet? How about you ease off and work on your own family instead of criticizing others on theirs and trying to deny couples their own?
Reply
What a bunch of filthy anti-gay bigots these “Red State Feminists” are. They try to wrap up their bigotry in cute packages that not only justify it but make it smell like a rose. Aw, aren’t they wonderful these Mama Bears. No, they’re not. They are filthy rotten un-American BIGOTS. The fact is, backed up by virtually all of science, medicine, and psychology, that a small percentage of us are gay by no choice of their own. That is fact. Exact “causes” are not understood but the world’s objective brains know gay people never “chose” to be gay. (Who would? Considering all the filthy bigots waiting to denigrate them…who would?)
So the question becomes: how do we treat them? As equals or pariahs? These vicious ugly witches who write articles like this are no better than the KKK and how they treat blacks. Same attitudes, different target.
Good parents are good parents. Good people are good people. Whether a person naturally falls in love with the opposite gender like the majority or the same gender like the minority, has NOTHING to do with their character as a human being.
I can’t wait for these foul, pitiful bigots to be beaten back into their hateful world like the KKK was 40 years ago. Gay people are PEOPLE. And in this country we are ALL equal, not just the heterosexuals.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 19:52
Dannie M.,
You’ve got the word “bigot” to describe people who disagree with you down to a T. Win friends, influence people.
We are ‘all equal’ in this country.
Which means that if a small group of people decide they want to kill all gays, that most likely won’t happen. But it also means the gay tail won’t wag the hetero dog–no matter how many tantrums are thrown and no matter how many times those who can’t persuade the majority throw around the word ‘bigot.’
No one is burning crosses on gay yards. Intimidation is happening, but in California, it was from the side that favored gay marriage. No one is saying there can’t be gays.
Gays celebrate their differences–some would argue that they flaunt it–except when that which they celebrate stands in their way of enjoying something.
Thanks for the comment.
Reply
Dannie M. Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 20:03
Nobody ever said gay people want special rights or priveleges, or that gay people want to force anything on anyone. “Equal” means if straight people have access to a marriage license at the courthouse for $45 that brings 1,138 federal benefits in one fell swoop, then since it is not illegal to be gay then gay people must have equal access to it. What part of that is confusing to you, dear? You can cry and whine all day long trying to justify your prejudice, but since Stonewall in 1969 the process was set in motion. You and your anti-gay ilk are going the way of the KKK, no matter how much you try to wrap yourself is false martyrdom.
“Bigot: One who is strongly partial to one’s own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ.”
The key here is the intolerance you spew. You can believe anything you want about gay people, but unless someone is forcing you to be in a same sex relationship then you have to shut your big yap and tolerate those who are different.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 20:21
Dannie M.
You’ve been tolerated. That you can spew to your heart’s content is partial proof.
You’re asking me to condone, to bless, to look upon you in a manner that approves.
Nope.
Spew. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
Reply
Dannie M. Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 13:36
Admin – that is a LIE. I would never expect you to “condone” or “bless” anything about me. I long ago learned that no matter what yuo do in life there will be people who disagree or hate you or whatever. Your opinion of gay people or of me is completely irrelevant; you give yourself WAY too much importance.
I understand it’s part of the house of cards you need to build in order to justify your un-American bigotry, and I understand that nobody wants to thin kof themselves as a bigot so instead you just call it today’s buzzword from people attacking you (boo hoo hoo for the poor trodden-upon martyr), but honey while I’m sure you have plenty of great qualities, on this issue you are nothing but a two-bit bigot with a stubborn attitude and a hateful mind.
“Homophobia is like racism and anti-Semitism and other forms of bigotry in that it seeks to dehumanize a large group of people, to deny their humanity, their dignity and personhood. This sets the stage for further repression and violence that spread all too easily to victimize the next minority group.”
–Coretta Scott King
Reply
Elizabeth Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 21:47
Dannie, you’re talking to a poorly built brick wall, but one that is entitled to his/her opinion. We all know that equality is around the corner, so let the death rattle ensue. You are not going to change this person’s mind by throwing out the word bigot like business cards in a crowded room. He/she has made up his/her mind and fortunately so have the new generation.
Reply
Ha! These people are hilarious! Frankly, I don’t give a fig if the–sigh…–”mama grizzlies” of the world don’t want the gays to get married. The gays will get married anyway, and I doubt the author of the article will be asked to RSVP (and would anyone really miss her if she didn’t show?). Matter of fact, I’m looking forward to being around for the next few decades to watch as each state in this country slowly crosses over to “the dark side.” I hope we can drag it out for a good long time, maybe one state a year, so we get a good batch of crazies like this every so often. “Lock up your kids! The gays are coming to get them!”
Reply
admin Reply:
September 9th, 2010 at 22:30
Andrea & Elizabeth,
It’s mentally healthy to look to the future–especially when the present hasn’t turned out to be what you’d prefer.
Thanks for the comments.
Reply
[...] Consevative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage | DBKP … [...]
I’m with Glenn. Your points just are not persuasive.
Reply
I don’t condone raising children as fundamentalists. But I recognize that it is the right of parents to do so. So I tolerate it. We tolerate things we don’t like that are required to be to keep our country free and our country people equal. The mainstreaming of same-sex marriage will not (or should not) require anyone to condone homosexuality. It does require tolerance however. And the real risk to the freedom of those opposed is that their objections will be perceived as intolerance, which breeds more intolerance and marginalizes those opposed to same-sex marriage from society. That would benefit no one.
Reply
Touche’! You’re quite the witty deflector, admin. I assure you that my present is in superb standing. You, however, seem to be shaking in your boots a bit, dear. Another mentally healthy thing is to brace one’s self for inevitable change. Just a thought.
Thanks for the response.
Reply
Wow another person that must not watch Becks story’s. He does not comment on people, he allows the people’s own words to show who they are. I do not agree with all of Beck but I love the fact that he has exposed the left and the right. When bush was in power he pointed out the idiots that were dangerous on the Right, when Obama took power he allows their own words to show who these Lier’s are on both sides…. I am not happy with the direction he is taking his message now because it is moving away from teaching who the people are to trying to convince people that God is going to save us even though Christianity in the US has been destroyed by corporate materialism on the Right and Social destruction on the left. We are in trouble as a nation and until people research and see what is actually going on instead of harping on Beck, listen to the Lie’s of Shawn Hannity and you will learn the truth, listen to the words not spoken by Obama and you will learn the truth, listen to the truth being spoken by the Elder Statesmen around Obama they do speak out and tell you what they are doing. Listen to what these idiots at the CFR have been saying for 60 years and you will know the truth. Research every presidential directive signed since 1970 and you will see what will happen in the next few years. We have been played for 40 years now and environmentalism, destruction of the middle class and destruction of the family all will give these people the justification of carrying out their plans for changing America. We are being trained to accept a lower life style, we are being taught from a young age to “need” government assistance because with global “governance”, all civilizations will have a more balanced life style which means the theft of our wealth the past 4 years has been to raise up the rest of the world and lower our living expectations and when you research, that is exactly what their own papers say beginning in 1962 when an official war against the US, Middle Class and family began. The ending of the Usury Laws in 1979 by Carter allowed for the GREED of people to be exposed by credit card companies and they predicted every american because of materialism and how we are being raised to Consume, would over spend and be broke by 2000. We are a few years behind in their destruction but when you start to look at the goals of warming, economics, financial destruction, bubbles being created intentionally by Barney Frank in 2002, the end of financial responsibility in 1999 by ending a law that protected our financial companies from being able to be banks and insurance companies allowing them to get money from teh Fed., all these laws have been collective between the right and left and if you have not researched the facts, then you are just another Pawn loved by CFR, Rome, Tri-lat, Bilderb, Dem’s and Repubs. It amazes me how many fabulous people intelligent people have not used the information in front of them to look at both sides because of our country’s destruction every couple years by both sides. The ignorance is the success of the elites that are counting on all of us just taking sides like this is a game. The left right paradigm. Please wake up.
Reply
To those of you using the Bible as a weapon against homosexuality, you are wrong. Homosexuality is not a sin. The Bible is constantly being taken out of context to support anti-gay views. Scholars who have studied the Bible in context of the times and in relation to other passages have shown those passages (Leviticus, Corinthians, Romans, etc) have nothing to do with homosexuality. These passages often cherry-picked while ignoring the rest of the Bible. The sins theses passages are referring to are idolatry, Greek temple sex worship, prostitution, pederasty with teen boys, and rape, not homosexuality or two loving consenting adults.
http://www.soulfoodministry.org/docs/English/NotASin.htm
http://www.jesus21.com/content/sex/bible_homosexuality_print.html
http://www.christchapel.com/reclaiming.html
http://www.stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/BiblicalReferences.php
http://www.gaychristian101.com/
Reply
Admin, whether you are male or female (who knows), if you REALLY want to live by “Christian morals according to the Bible”. First, you need to pick whichever “version” of the Bible suits you (awefully conveneint if you ask me). Then, you’ll need to take a REALLY good look at your everyday lifestyle… and change about 90% of it.
Or, you can just do what your already doing… being a mealymouthed preacher, boating about your “Christian” and “Conservative” values in this blog… then switch over to internet porn as soon as your spouse leaves the room.
God, I am SO SICK of you “so-called” holier-than-though Conservative Hypocrites.
Reply
You assertions are a bit hard to follow. Let me respond to the major contentions you put forth:
1. Marriage is between a man and woman- This is a fairly new concept, as more ancient traditions varied greatly, the most popular of course being multiple women were the property of a single man. This particular arrangement is endorsed in the Bible.
2. Gays should have equal rights, but not “marriage”- This is a paradox as civil unions do not provide equal rights. Perhaps if all unions were civil unions and churches decided for themselves which to accept as “marriages”, everyone would be happy?
3. Gays getting married harms the “family unit”- This is completely fabricated, and current evidence shows no damage to hetero couple marriages due to gays being married. More gay marriages, however provide a stable opportunity for adopted children that would otherwise stay in the judicial system, so you are in fact arguing against the creation of stable environments and families, because you don’t like how they would look- regardless of effect on children. Unless you are purporting a life in the foster system is preferable to a stable home with gays or lesbians.
Lastly (and my favorite)
4. “Moral decline is the reason societies fall”- How interesting that you believe the entire destruction of society could be just from gays getting married, completely ignoring the rampant hetero divorce rates, child abuse, rape, negligent parents, alcoholism, drug abuse, and the plethora of other issues that have a much greater impact on society- the overwhelming majority of which come from heterosexuals.
In fact, you have audacity to attempt to paint a picture where a minority population is the primary reason for a downfall of society.
You are being completely irrational, hysterical, and intentionally negligent.
Reply
So you asked whether Eric was arguing that 70% of Americans should just keep their mouths shut while a small cabal of judges and activists shove something else down their throats over their wishes, and after reading it, I don’t believe he was.
When you put it like that, it helps me to empathize with where it is you are coming from. You feel that allowing gay marriage when the majority appears to be against it is a violation, and that changing the decision against it went against the will of the people.
But at the same time, I don’t really see allowing gays to marry each other to be shoving it down any throats. It’s not like same-sex marriage is now mandated, and opposite-sex marriage isn’t.
Sure, the church teaches against it, and a lot of us believe that it’s wrong, and that’s why we don’t marry people of the same sex. We believe in traditional marriage. It’s our right.
But is it really our right to take away the opportunity for an entire minority of people from marrying? If all men are created equal, and we are to be treaty equally under the law, then it only makes sense that two consenting adults should be allowed to marry one another.
If we continue to otherwise deny them this right, then we ourselves are going against the divinely-inspired Constitution.
As for the comparison with your teenage daughter drinking, all homosexuals are not your teenage daughter. Quite a lot are people just like the rest of us, and they aren’t after unhealthy thrills and poisons of the soul, but rather they are after marriage, family, societal integration, raising children, and being the best they can be, just like you and me. Why should they be denied that because of a religious belief?
I’m just saying…. Glenn wasn’t so off on this one.
Reply
Dannie M. Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 13:28
Nicole, what a wonderfully-expressed post. You capture it all perfectly. Thank you.
Reply
As someone who believes gays should have the same rights as everyone else, the right to marry, adopt, take care of foster child, I find it interesting the guy who campaigned on the promise of an advocate of gays has so far, let his Justice Dept. filed briefs in court cases defending anti-gay marriage legislation while his advisor confirmed in August Obama DOES NOT SUPPORT GAY MARRIAGE.
-Why would you deflect the discussion to Obama? I don’t recall reading posters heralding him as a visionary on gay rights?
I really don’t see what this straw man has to do with the discussion at hand?
Reply
LBG1 Reply:
September 10th, 2010 at 22:07
ApolloGenX:
Obama isn’t a straw man, he’s the President, the same man who, when he ran for President, promised gays he would be their advocate. The same guy who instructed his Justice Dept. to file a brief supporting the California anti-gay marriage law. The top official who is opposed to gay marriage. It’s called deflection, Apollo, the disappointment and anger directed away from Obama, the “straw man” who broke his promise to gays who voted for him, focused on one sector of society who doesn’t support gay marriage. Why isn’t the focus on Obama, his opposition to gay marriage? Why shouldn’t he be part of this conversation?
Reply
As a married, gay man living in Massachusetts, I just want to say thank you about 95% of those who’ve posed on this website. I cannot believe the support.
Grizzly, you are irrelevant.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 11th, 2010 at 14:25
…at least to the 95% who agreed with you.
Reply
Fo04 Reply:
September 11th, 2010 at 22:44
Is that death rattle getting hard to keep up, admin?
Reply
admin Reply:
September 11th, 2010 at 22:55
Keep prayin’…
Reply
I was just going to tell you to do the same thing, friend! Looks like DADT isn’t going to pull through. What’s next, huh? I’m thinking Rhode Island or New York, but that is just in the good ‘ol US of A. I’ll pour you a cup of coffee if you’re finding it difficult to wake up.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 12th, 2010 at 01:27
Fo04,
Every difference of opinion is not the Apocalypse.
I can remember when the total deductions from a paycheck totaled about 2%. Think of that: 98% of what you earned, you got to keep and spend as you wished. If you made $500, you kept $490.
We have survived that great change; I’m guessing we’ll survive others. Of course, one of the greatest things I’ve learned is not to celebrate prematurely–or to give up the ship.
I bound out of bed each morning. But thanks for the coffee offer: it’s a down payment on the pot I down before hitting my stride.
thanks for the comment.
Reply
[...] during joint Alaska …The Canadian PressAlaska Dispatch (blog) -Chicago Tribune -DBKP – Death By 1000 Papercutsall 1,182 news [...]
red state feminists … thank you, I needed a good laugh today.
They’re just a bunch of bitter, hateful, out of touch women.
Reply
admin Reply:
September 13th, 2010 at 01:25
bb,
…and yet, they did not call you “bitter, hateful [or] out of touch” while writing their piece.
Reply
[...] Again, these questions highlight why the voices of conservative women are so badly needed. While some male conservative ideologues go on and on about their constitutional rights (and that’s fine), can someone give conservative women the answers to these questions? What the heck is an economy for, ask the hard-working mothers of America, if the children can’t be fed and educated? Surely it isn’t to give the head of Goldman Sachs $68 million a year in pay . . . is it?? ALSO at DBKP: Conservative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage [...]
[...] Thompson told what had happened at My Lai to his superiors. Nothing was done for almost 18 months. When photos began to leak to the press, Congress held hearings, and Thompson again told what he knew. He was reviled as a traitor; dead animals were left on his porch; he received death threats. Thompson wondered why people hated him for telling the truth and trying to do the right thing. The only soldier punished for what happened at My Lai was Lt. Calley, who served a total of 4 months for what he did. Calley finally apologized in 2009 for his deeds. ALSO at DBKP: Conservative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage [...]
[...] What do we owe for these great legacies? We owe a gratitude that carries with it a sacred promise to preserve for our children and their children all that was bequeathed to us. It would be a most heinous crime to destroy what was given us, and deprive our children of their just inheritance. ALSO at DBKP: * Conservative Feminist: Simpson-Bowles Needs Some OWLs * Conservative Feminist: Free Oklahoma! * Conservative Feminist: 2010 Election Faves * Conservative Feminist: Free Molly Norris! * Conservative Feminist: No Sharia for Oklahoma * Conservative Feminists: Carl Paladino, Spare Us the Sexual Sermons * Conservative Feminist: Ohio Poll Answers Miss Me Yet Question * Conservative Feminist: A Discourse on the Need for Moral Capitalists * Conservative Feminist: Hugh Thompson, Glenn Andreotta, and Lawrence Colburn * Conservative Feminist: Middle Class Families Hurting * Conservative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage [...]
[...] At the same time, Red State Feminists deplore the fact that the signers of this document are all men. Gentlemen, think: marriage is about men and women. Why do the signatories to this document not represent that fact? Do you not understand that marriage is to be an equal partnership between men and women, and when you deem that fact unimportant, you degrade the cause? For shame. ALSO at DBKP: * Religious Law, the Constitution, and Women * Thanksgiving Thoughts on America’s “Elegant Decline”: Conservative Feminist * Conservative Feminist: Simpson-Bowles Needs Some OWLs * Conservative Feminist: Free Oklahoma! * Conservative Feminist: 2010 Election Faves * Conservative Feminist: Free Molly Norris! * Conservative Feminist: No Sharia for Oklahoma * Conservative Feminists: Carl Paladino, Spare Us the Sexual Sermons * Conservative Feminist: Ohio Poll Answers Miss Me Yet Question * Conservative Feminist: A Discourse on the Need for Moral Capitalists * Conservative Feminist: Hugh Thompson, Glenn Andreotta, and Lawrence Colburn * Conservative Feminist: Middle Class Families Hurting * Conservative Feminist: Glenn Beck Wrong on Gay Marriage [...]