RECENT  POSTS:  » NBC analyst Tony Dungy says he wouldn't have drafted Michael Sam » NOM becomes even more of a generalized anti-LGBT animus organization » Sure, NOM—I'll play your game!! » Bryan Fischer: POTUS 'stood on the graves' of Malaysia Air victims 'to promote the legitimacy of sexual deviancy' » Legal profession made up of ideologues, demands legal ideologue » FRC's senior fellow for exporting/criminalizing gay people bemoan's discrimination's dwindling acceptance » (ARCHIVED): President signs executive order protecting LGBT workers » That discriminatory Colorado baker won't make Halloween cakes either » Catholic Bishops again go after basic workplace protections for LGBT people » FL anti-gay activist, head of anti-gay Boy Scouts group says marriage inequality is 'issue worth dying for'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

06/19/2006

We go 'mano e mano' with Mitt; Mitt surely thinks 'mano e womano' would've been more appropriate

by Jeremy Hooper

From the Des Moines Register, quoting Mass. Gov. Mitt Romney's stumping for the '08 presidential nomination at this weekend's Iowa Republican State Convention:

  "Some people think we're intolerant and not willing to let people choose their own lifestyle" Romney said about a constitutional amendment that would define marriage between a man and woman. "That's not true."

From the sick of their crap mind of your writer, as he refuses to sit idly by and watch our opposition paint us in a duplicitous, unfavorable light:

   "And others of us think your position on gays is faulty because you say things like 'choose their own lifestyle,'" said your humble scribe in response to Romney's "it's a choice"-like comment. "That sh*t's not legit, Mitt."

The paper goes on to quote Romney as saying of the Supreme Court decision that legalized same-sex marriage in his state:

   "What they didn't understand is marriage is primarily about the nurture and development of children and every child deserves to have a mother and father," said Romney, who was given loud applause from an audience of more than 400 people.

Your scribe, determined to let no fallacious claim go unchallenged, goes on to reply:

   "Oh really, THAT's what they didn't understand about marriage -- that it's primarily a kid-producing custom? It must be because they missed the part of the traditional vows promising to have, hold, and to someday cart the little ones to soccer practice in a mini van. No Mitt, BEING A GOOD PARENT is the fundamental to the nurture and development of children. Every child deserves love, a good home, and stability, none of which are automatically afforded a couple once they slip the rings onto each other's fingers. Marriage is about the legal recognition of two adults who vow to take care of one another's every need, whether or not those needs involve offspring or not. Speaking on behalf of every infertile couple, single mom with a trophy-winning kid, lesbian couple raising a stellar set of twins, married couple who prefer career over diaper-changing, and gay couple who can't seal the deal with the one they love -- how dare you lead folks down the duplicitous path that "I do" and "It's a boy" are mutually dependent experiences? And this is coming from someone who loves and wants kids," said the humble scribe to needs no applause to justify his convictions.

2.5 years until the '08 election, Mitt. That's 29 months (that is, if you get the nomination) for us to challenge your gay stances in ways that we fear our elected/potential elected leaders never will. Looking forward to it.

Republicans talk war, gay marriage at convention [Des Moines Register]

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails