RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

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

08/18/2009

Maine M.D. inaccurately diagnoses state's ills

by Jeremy Hooper

There are many ridiculous, well-trodden reasons cited in Maine political columnist M.D. Harmon's new anti-equality musing. But his basic argument for why voters should "correct lawmakers' mistake" can be summed up like this:

How, proponents ask, can same-sex marriage affect others? Consider that if the veto effort fails, we will no longer require that marriages be composed of husbands and wives and mothers and fathers, but "Spouse 1 and Spouse 2," or "Parent 1 and Parent 2."

And that's not marriage, but something entirely different. People flocked to sign petitions because they know a "yes" vote preserves our society's absolutely essential stability.

SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: 'Yes' vote will correct lawmakers' mistake [Portland Press Herald]

So essentially, Mr. Harmon think gays and lesbians do not deserve their rights and liberties because heterosexual couples might someday face a form where they are asked to identify as parents or spouses rather than moms/dads or husbands/wives. Never mind that these are all mere terms, the likes of which can all be applied in various ways to both heterosexual and homosexual couples. For M.D., this solely semantical straw man trumps equal protection.

Why next thing you know, he'll paint time's progress as a cruise vacation on which only heterosexual people are invited on board...

But a marriage between a man and a woman is a family-building voyage into the future, launching generations to come.
SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: 'Yes' vote will correct lawmakers' mistake [Portland Press Herald]

Oh.

Please, for the love of decency, Maine: Help us launch generations of LGBT people out of the needless, time-wasting struggle that we current queers have had to pause our lives to fight!

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


Your thoughts

A change in nouns? THAT'S a threat?
Whata bunch of wusses. Are these the same crybabies who get upset when they call a helpline and have to "press 1 for English"?

Posted by: Bill S | Aug 18, 2009 5:21:55 PM

Nice response, as always. :-)

Personally, I like reading the article titled "SAME-SEX MARRIAGE: 'No' vote would uphold traditional Maine values" by Greg Kesich.

Its much easier on my eyes and very equality thinking.

http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=277377&ac=

Posted by: Sam | Aug 18, 2009 5:53:27 PM

Are marriage-equality Mainers actually doing something to respond to the bigots?

Posted by: ---- | Aug 18, 2009 5:56:31 PM

Just like that couple in California who wouldn't get married because they didn't want to sign "spouse A" and "Spouse B" and then claimed it was somehow violating their rights.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Aug 18, 2009 6:04:07 PM

That last line...ugh. He must be Sarah's speech writer.

Posted by: Matt Algren | Aug 18, 2009 7:01:18 PM

Sorry Mr. Harmon, but my kids are far happier since their dad died and I came out of the closet. They certainly give the lie to your opinions - and that's all they are - opinions. I'm far happier as well, I might add. You would be amazed how many women is same-sex relationships had children before ending their heterosexual relationships - and now raise those children with female partners. I have also met several gay parents who chose to adopt or go through the in vitro process. They are families worthy of respect - and legal protection, such as yours has. Just because you loathe homosexuals - and it is quite clear that you do - does not give you, or any other "voter" the right to determine OUR rights or responsibilities. Quite frankly, your narrow-minded perspective astonishes me.

Posted by: mpalmer | Aug 18, 2009 7:31:37 PM

Incidentally, there's quite a lively exchange going on at the Facebook "Stand For Marriage Maine" page attached to this article. Most recently someone compared parents who accept their gay kids to pedophiles.

Not sure this link will work...

http://bit.ly/9KjTc (And yes, I have screencaps just in case.)

Posted by: Matt Algren | Aug 18, 2009 8:23:08 PM

In my experience I've met many an M.D. who were religious fruitcakes. I don't know what it is about the field that drives them to be that way. Maybe it's the God Complex thing.

Posted by: Tony P | Aug 18, 2009 10:21:32 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails