Another day, another linking of gay marriage to polygamy
In a "First-Person" for Southern Baptist news source BP News, Kelly Boggs becomes the latest "pro-fam" type to hop on the "Gay/polygamy, tomato/tomahto" bandwagon. He begins his piece by saying:
"I am bi-sexual and I practice polyamory [group marriage]," the man told me. I am your worst nightmare.
I thought for a moment. No sir, I said. You are not my worst nightmare; you are my best illustration against the redefinition of marriage.
The context for the exchange cited above was a debate a few years ago on the issue of "homosexual marriage." It was one of the few times that I have heard a homosexual activist admit publicly that the acceptance of 'gay marriage' would legitimize the argument for marriages involving more than two people.
Okay, so let's stop here. (A) "Bisexual" is not a hyphenate. (B) This man with whom Mr. Boggs claim to have had a conversation is not doing at all what he says he is. He's not even beginning to admit "that the acceptance of 'gay marriage' would legitimize the argument for marriages involving more than two people." In fact, the very notion that he would classify himself with both descriptors (i.e. bisexual and polyamorous) is actually testament to the fact that the two concepts are entirely separate. So right off the bat this is a dishonest set-up, as the man doesn't even speak on wanting to marry ONE of his partners, nor does he link his orientation (in this case both sexes) to his choices in terms of romantic involvement (dating more than one partner). A public admittance such as the one Mr. Boggs is describing would be: "I like a boy and a girl, and if you allow me to marry the aforementioned boy, I will parlay that into a legal challenge wherein I'll try and obtain the right to marry the girl as well." Unfortunately for Mr. Boggs, this is not the case.
Moving on, Boggs continues:
While activists have been very successful in removing the moral stigma American society once attached to homosexuality, they understand that the vast majority of their fellow citizens are not ready to receive an invitation announcing the nuptials of Bob, Larry, John, Mary and Jane.
Perception is everything when attempting to change public opinion. In order to present "gay marriage" as a normal expression of the human condition, homosexual activists have kept their polyamory practicing brothers and sisters in the closet. However, the advocates of polyamory have started knocking.
Uhm, Mr. Boggs -- yea hi, the state of Utah called, and they want you to address the estimeated 30,000 polygamists living their alone, few of whom we imagine are homosexual. But since heterosexual polygamy is conveniently unaddressed in Mr. Boggs' article, we will ignore the pink elephant as well. After all, there are many other points to shoot down, and his ignoring of reality would seem to only speak to the ridiculous nature of his overall claim.
Speaking of ridiculous claims, it's enraging for Mr. Boggs to say we gays "understand that the vast majority of their fellow citizens are not ready to receive an invitation announcing the nuptials of Bob, Larry, John, Mary and Jane," when what he is really speaking to is the "pro-family" types' own realization. They know that their peeps are typically even more freaked out about polygamy than homosexuality, thus the reason why they continually try and link the two. We're not hiding gay polygamists in the closet; we don't even deny that there are gay polygamists. There are gay EVERYTHINGs! This is because gay is who you are, not what you do!
Pressing forward, Mr. Boggs goes on criticize the recent Advocate magazine feature looking into polygamy within the gay community:
The point of The Advocate piece is crystal clear; polyamory is an accepted practice in the homosexual community. If "gay marriage" ever becomes the law in America, polyamory and polygamy will be the next issue homosexual activists will promote.
Since we've spoken on piece far too many times already, we will not waste any more words explaining why a publication's investigation into a topic does not, in fact, constitute an endorsement by the magazine, much less an entire community of humans. We just hope the Advocate doesn't do an investigation into gays who enjoy French cuisine, as we are not fond of escargot, and would hate to have to eat it just because our queer Bible has permanently married us all to the delicacy.
Look, we take such great exception with this line of thinking, not because of our stance for or against polygamy. We are not even speaking on that multi-partnered notion, as it has zero relevance to our fight. If polygamists of all stripes want to take their battle to the courts, then they're going to have to wage their own campaigns. They have the right to do so! And if folks want to stop them, they're gonna have to get marriage limited so that polygamy is officially banned. They, too, have the right to do so! And if/when this happens, gays and straights will fall in various places on both sides of the issue. But the religious right's continual misleading on this as part of their gay campaigns is, in our opinion, a perfect example of their entire "culture war" stratagem -- deceive, twist, and scare folks in order to rally them through fear.
There is polyamory within the gay community and there is monogamy within the gay community. Gay marriage by its very nature involves the latter. If you on the "pro-family" side want to challenge the notion of the former, then stump for a Monogamy Protection Act with all your might! But while you guys are drawing up your clever tag lines and messages for that campaign, please refrain from muddying the waters of your current, homo-centric endeavor any more than you already have.
FIRST-PERSON: A stunning admission about polygamy [BP News]
comments powered by Disqus