RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM to gay families: Your relationships are 'simply about adult sexual desires' » Maggie Gallagher's new gig » How do you even talk with a movement that insists we 'cannot coexist'? » Sen. Manchin picks odd way to (D-istinguish) himself » Photo: Before city council votes on nondiscrimination, Charlotte anti-LGBT activists frame us as 'Homo-Nazis' » AG Holder: 'Marriage equality is an idea whose time has come.' » Viciously anti-gay activist Scott Lively to help us show SCOTUS what animus looks like; thanks, doll! » Audio: NOM prez equates his anti-gay fight with defeating slavery, conquering 'evils that were occurring in the Roman empire' » SCOTUS deals another blow to NOM; more to surely come! » Federal judge strikes Nebraska's discriminatory marriage ban  

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

01/30/2009

Audio: Don't they bore themselves?

by Jeremy Hooper

"Homosexual Agenda." "Undermine the institution of marriage." "Special treatment." "Forcing acceptance on the rest of us."

If we were bound to only a handful of hyperbolic phrases, we would fill quite stifled. We would also question why, despite possessing our own independent brains that are hopefully capable of forming our own opinions, we are all forced to stay on the same constrictive communiqué that has been decided upon by our movement. After all, nonfiction should not need a pre-approved script -- it's purveyors should feel compelled to talk a blue streak without fear that they are going to get off message.

However, our opposition seems to be quite okay with trading in their right to use autonomous, heartfelt thought in favor of canned talking points. Fond, even:





**Audio source: Family News In Focus

Seriously, social conservatives: If the bias doesn't disturb you, doesn't the bizarre need to stick to a certain playbook raise at least half an eyebrow? Aren't your ready to reject the artifice and embrace the real? Aren't you all as over this whole "culture war" contrivance (boom, boom! -- bang, bang!) as much as we are? It's all just so -- childish.

*EARLIER: We're Number 1 (if you're not gay)! We're number 1 (if you're not gay)! [G-A-Y]

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


Your thoughts

"Unmarried straight couples don't get these benefits, so why should unmarried gay couples?"

My God, do these people hear themselves talk?

Posted by: John | Jan 30, 2009 12:14:43 PM

This is one of the things that I noticed most watching Milk; not only are they using the same talking points, that we've reputed and shown to be bollox, over and over. They're using the same talking points as Anita Bryant. Thirty, forty years and they haven't come up with a single new reason why we shouldn't be recognized as fully equal people.

Posted by: Kearne | Jan 30, 2009 12:53:15 PM

It's the most fundamental law of biology, if you don't adapt, you die. That's why they're losing the war.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Jan 30, 2009 3:07:02 PM

Well, their vocabulary is limited to only what is in the King James Version, so they are starting with something of a deficit to begin with. If they ever once read anything not condoned by the seventeenth century church hierarchy, that might be cause for ostracization.

Posted by: Dick Mills | Jan 30, 2009 4:52:13 PM

"They will not be satisfied until marriage is completely defined and they're forcing acceptance on the rest of us." -- and how long have you been forcing your religion on us?

Posted by: jaysays | Jan 30, 2009 5:51:17 PM

Blah blah blah blah blah blah *yawn*

Posted by: GT | Jan 31, 2009 3:19:07 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails