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 »

10/30/2009

'Yes on 1 (at any cost)' embraces campaign's 'silly season'; forgive us if we don't crack a smile

by Jeremy Hooper

Stand-For_marriage-MaineAs we round the bend and aggressively push towards the finish line, our opposition in Maine is getting ever more heated in their attempts to turn the public against us. Earlier this week we saw Brian Camenker, Peter LaBarbera, Maggie Gallagher, and Paul Madore helped us all fully flesh out the sort of over-the-top motivations and inextricable connections that have been bubbling under the campaign since day one. Then yesterday, the official campaign held a press conference in which they not only turned a negligent vocal cord to LGBT people, but also to the entire Maine public school system!

Here are some clips from that presser, in five parts (all YouTubes from this user):

***

"Those people." "Sexual preferences." Denunciation of sex ed in general. This former teacher says absolutely nothing -- NOTHING! -- that relates to gays getting married. He does, however, demonstrate the need to foster rather than combat understanding and acceptance:

Again, this teacher says absolutely nothing about same-sex marriage in schools. Instead, he's talking 100% about anti-bullying programs (which we would've hoped everyone could support), and his bizarre belief that these kinds of things are some kind of slippery slope:

Now, you can't really be mad at the teen in the next clip, as she's at the age when she very well may not understand the clear difference between religious clubs and those non-faith-based organizations that seek to end harassment for certain kinds of students, and why a public, tax-supported educational institution draws a distinction between the two. But you can absolutely raise an eyebrow at her parents, who, rather than explain as much, chose to instead put her in this press conference:

And here are two more students, pushing the canard that public schools have a hierarchy of protection. And in the process, rocking the incredibly offensive notion that Maine's public school system is a Christian-bash-athon, an unbelievably negligent idea that "yes on 1" has clearly adopted as a strategy:

And now our favorite clip -- one that features the supposedly hard luck tale of Don Mendell. You might remember that we questioned Mr. Mendell and his role as a publicly anti-gay personality a full five days before he ever appeared in a "yes on 1" ad. And we did so (and do so) unabashedly, considering Mr. Mendel, on his own free will, chose to (a) write editorials wherein he said, among other things, that gay couples "ridicule tradition and belief in natural law" and that their marriages constitute "a change that strikes to the heart of the Sacraments," and (b) chose to undermine his school's pro-acceptance, pro-diversity programs to the press. We said at the time that if we had a child at Nokomis High School, we would be very reluctant to entrust our children or our own parental needs to someone who has openly declared war on our household. Because let's be honest -- how could we not?!?!

Now, we don't know whether or not a parent actually filed an official complaint against Mr. Mendell, but we can't say we're all that surprised if they did. Just as he has the right to become a public spokesperson for bias, those who suffer under that bias have the right to raise questions. The merits will be mediated elsewhere. Though we would advise Mr. Mendell that if he really wants to distance himself from anti-gay rhetoric, he will seek legal help outside of the Alliance Defense Fund, considering they are one of the most rabidly homo-hostile groups to ever court America:

*ALL videos: VYOQ1 [YT]

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


Your thoughts

They want to muddle it all together. Mentioning the existence of LGBT people in their families, and curriculum and books that present that existence on a non-judgmental and tolerant light is the exact same thing as "teaching same-sex marriage." Once it's all safely muddle together, they can rely on what none of them (save for Camenker and LaBarbera) would openly admit during the campaign, which is that "Yes on 1" is relying mostly on fear, resentment, and disapproval of LGBT people and their families.

It's based on ignorance of our very nature; it's based on ignorant views concerning whether LGBT people choose their orientation; it's based on ignorance of what sexual orientation is to begin with.

The more informed members of the campaign know the difference, but they're relying on ignorance to get their measure passed. They make the very specific claim that same-sex marriage will taught in schools, and to prove it all they have to do is use the words "gay" and "school" in the same sentence. It's so void of integrity.

And pardon me while I choke on the hypocrisy of them accusing anyone else of shutting out dissent and opposing voices.

Posted by: Christopher Eberz | Oct 30, 2009 2:56:39 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails