Anti-gay activism is really going to the dogs (and cats)
What does Maine's organized marriage equality opposition look like? Well consider the following little nugget from Steve Whiting, an attorney who serves on the Board of Directors of Maine's largest anti-gay advocacy group, Maine Family Policy Council (formerly the Christian Civic League of Maine). You can decide for yourself whether a pooper scooper or a litter box would be a better way to handle it:
A man walked into City Hall carrying his cat.
Man: “Hi. I would like a dog license for my pet.”
Clerk: “That's a cat. I can't give you a dog license for your cat. I can give you a cat license. That will give her all the same privileges as a dog.”
Man: “She already has a cat license. That's not good enough. People think of her as just a cat. Dogs are thought of more highly. Man's best friend, you know. I want to get her a dog license and call her a dog. Then people will think of her as a dog.”
Clerk: “I don't think so. Anyway, I cannot give you a dog license for your cat.”
Man: “Look, it's not fair that only dogs can get dog licenses. Let's just call everything with fur and four legs a dog. Now give me a dog license.”
Clerk: “That's a novel idea. I imagine that would include bears and mice too. Anyway, I still cannot give you a dog license for your cat. The law won't let me.”
Man: “All right. I'll go to the Legislature and get them to change the law to call everything with fur and four legs a dog. Then I can get a dog license for my cat, and people will start thinking of her as a dog. I'll tell the legislators that it's a civil rights issue. Then they'll give me whatever I want.”
Clerk: “You are probably right. But she still looks like a cat to me.”
Gay Marriage [MFPC]
So it's your choice, Gov. Baldacci. Do you want to want to support the fair and equal legal recognition of human citizens whose sexual orientations draw them to members of the same sex, or do you want to support the catty idea that gays are trying to ruff roughen up marriage in a way comparable to an all-out species alteration?
No need to answer now. You can just throw us a bone by way of your signature!!
**MORE: Joe.My.God. has more on the campaign that MFPC is already launching in order to combat the likely possibility of marriage equality: "People's Veto" Campaign Against Marriage Equality Launches In Maine [JMG]
**SEE ALSO: The doggone catfight seems to be a new far-right meme. See longtime foe of the 'mos Robert Knight assert the same pussy pushy idea:
I love it when our opponents try to do humor and parody, because it just comes across as stupid. It's humorous alright, but not in the way they intended. They could be dismissed as laughable if they weren't such virulent busybodies sticking their snotty noses into the affairs of everyone else.
Posted by: Richard Rush | May 4, 2009 10:55:16 AM
Keep it up everyone.... MARRIAGE EQUALITY ... and no other terms to be used!
Posted by: LOrionL | May 4, 2009 11:06:13 AM
Well, the one thing that he got right is that in his usage of the age-old dog-antagonizing-cat conflict: he accurately identifies his (obviously) canine inspired viciousness toward GLBTs with the dog in his analogy. And us as the (terrorized, traumatized, stigmatized and "chased up a tree for fear of being bitten on the ass - and not in a good way") felines who are the ones in fear for our lives.
Posted by: Dick Mills | May 4, 2009 11:22:17 AM
Using his own analogy:
And all the poor guy wanted was a pet license for his cat.
I think the problem is that these people see this as a dog vs cat thing and not a pet thing.
Posted by: DanM | May 4, 2009 11:49:41 AM
"I think the problem is that these people see this as a dog vs cat thing and not a pet thing."
Exactly, Dan! That's perfectly succinct.
Posted by: G-A-Y | May 4, 2009 11:56:47 AM
Don't they know by now that no one wants pet advice from Cruella de Vil?
Posted by: Timothy | May 4, 2009 1:37:56 PM
okay, it's an animal license, not a pet license.
that's one thing you won't see the Religious Right doing -- correcting a mistake with accurate information.
Posted by: Jason D | May 4, 2009 6:06:47 PM
I love this analogy, it's so simple, so reduced, it completely misses the point from our point of view: marriage is a civil right because it legally binds two people in love, and ridicules their view: marriage is supposed to be between one man and one women as god intended it that way - but they've said that the reason it shouldn't be changed is a more a language usage situation. Language changes and one day perhaps all things with four legs and fur will be known as dogs....
However, in the here and now, we define marriage as a civil contract between two people who want to share everything, and no attempt to ridicule a change in meaning that happened way before we were all born will change that.
Oh yeah and I forgot "lol."
Posted by: Corvidae | May 4, 2009 6:28:09 PM
For a second I thought his story was going to be about a guy trying to marry his cat at city hall... perhaps that's for the next press release
Posted by: Joe | May 4, 2009 7:27:07 PM
I've got an even better idea. How about I just say whatever cruel, mean-spirited thing I want about LGBT people. While I'm at it I'll demand they be denied the rights I take for granted. I'll call it my "religious liberty". Nobody can deny me anything I demand in the name of "religious liberty" after all.
Posted by: Buffy | May 5, 2009 1:49:58 AM
Well, their logic in this argument is flawed. Dog or cat...they're both animals. And all they wany is to get a license.
Straight or queer, we're all human. And we want our licenses.
Posted by: Caoimhe | May 5, 2009 1:58:47 PM
"I can give you a cat license. That will give her all the same privileges as a dog."
Hang on. Is this support for full civil unions?
Posted by: Timothy (TRiG) | May 5, 2009 7:29:03 PMcomments powered by Disqus