RECENT  POSTS:  » Report: US District judge won't deny justice to gay Coloradans; might delay it, though » AFA to POTUS: End your 'love affair with homosexuality,' give anti-gay Christians entitlement instead » Congressional right wing's right-side-of-history whip count: 8–271 » NOM, Manhattan Declaration turn Unitarian's anti-slavery, anti-war into pro-discrimination anthem » Matt Barber and Peter LaBarbera tease America's coming anti-gay street revolts » FRC writer: We're not all the same, 'gay agenda' is 'dangerous for the wellbeing of this nation' » 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'  

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

01/28/2008

NYC: Great place for anti-gays to visit (with bias), not live (and let live)

by Jeremy Hooper

Ny-1In response to the "no duh"-like news that gay activists wish to replace those New York lawmakers who are hostile towards our marriages with ones who would push for marriage equality, Focus on the Family's Jenny Tyree says the following:

Homosexual activists who would redefine marriage would not be targeting state legislators if they didn't have something to gain, and there's no doubt it would be to the detriment of the next generation of New Yorkers,” she said.

Homosexual unions are not a minor change, but a radical redefinition of the one institution we know to be best for children.

An annoying quote to which this New York-based writer responds:

"No doubt it would be to the detriment of New Yorkers"? Yea, Jen? "No Doubt"? As in, you, Jenny Tyree, have a crystal ball that shows you a year 2075 in which New Yorkers are dealing with an apocalypse brought upon by legally wed gay and lesbian couples? "No doubt," as in you feel that your Colorado Springs-based self can and should speak to the hearts and minds of New Yorkers? "No doubt," meaning you feel that your Christian belief in the so-called "sanctity of marriage" gives you lock-solid insight into the bedrooms of Empire Staters of all faiths? You're seriously saying that there is "no doubt" that we gays are going to negatively rock the worlds of all New Yorkers from Staten Island to Massena? How brazen of you, Ms. Tyee.

But here's what we think, J-Ty. We think that marriage equality is less of a "radical redefinition," and more of a minor change that would increase the well-being of millions of New Yorkers (and, by extension, Americans), present and future. It is a simple push to open up an already in-place institution so that it treats Man-havin' Manhattan man in Apt 1C the same as the lady-lovin' dude in Apt 2D. And encouraging marriage equality is not only what is best for gay adults and best for kids of gay parents, but also what is best for any human being who values equality and respect for all over myopia and malignity for some!

Jenny: The only children for whom marriage inequality is "best," is those whose parents wish to keep "Smear The Queer" a beloved childhood game. That may be the popular pastime that those in your Colorado Springs-based bubble wish to encourage, Ms. Tyree, but here in New York, a majority of us seem to be more fond of other games. Like football (
Go Giants!). And baseball (Go Mets!). And bias-battling progression (Go Spitzer!)"

Gay Activists Target Pro-Marriage Lawmakers in N.Y [CitizenLink]

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


Your thoughts

re: “Homosexual unions are not a minor change, but a radical redefinition of the one institution we know to be best for children.”

Best for whose children? There's an estimated 9 million cases of child abuse EACH YEAR. I don't see that as being best for the children.

Posted by: May | Jan 28, 2008 12:34:25 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails