Heartless, Con-Meant-To-Cut -- Population: Our opposition
This writer and his husband live in New York. Like many couples after six years of partnership, we wanted to marry. So this past June, we did. In Connecticut.
Why Connecticut? Well, because NY won't yet allow us to marry, but WILL recognize our out-of-state union. So we had to go somewhere else to obtain the rights that our locale would honor yet not perform, exporting the commerce and enjoyment to a state other than our own. First we planned to have a destination wedding in California, but that was forcibly cancelled due to a tyrannical majority vote. So after some time to process and get our bearings, we chose to move all of the planning to the Constitution State.
What was our "strategy" in all this? Simple: To share our love with our friends, family, and each other. To solidify our lifetime commitment. To obtain the same rights and benefits as our hetero peers (at least on the state level). To register for fun gifts and have an excuse to go on a celebratory vacation. To finally BE MARRIED.
Yet according to the unrepentant 'mo foes at and affiliated with Focus on the Family, our "strategy" was not about us and our family. No, no. It was simply to spread our gayness all across America:
One year ago, the Connecticut Supreme Court legalized same-sex marriage. Since then, half of the gay couples who have married in the state have been from other states or other countries, the Hartford Courant reported.
Marriage advocates say the influx of out-of-staters indicates Connecticut was part of a national strategy.
"This isn't a surprise to me," Peter Wolfgang, executive director of the Family Institute of Connecticut, told the Courant. "We warned all along that they would use this state as a springboard to force it on the rest of the country. This wasn't accomplished by people that cared about Connecticut. This was accomplished by people who had a national strategy. They achieved their aim and then they moved on."
Gay Activists Work to Spread Same-Sex Marriage [FOF]
Because that's all we are to these folks who have chosen to turn our lives into a lifestyle. We're a "tactic." A "strategy." A nuisance that is not here to actually enjoy our own lives, but rather put on this Earth for the purposes of annoying evangelical Christians. They will never allow for the possibility that out-of-state couples are coming to Connecticut out of the deep desire for love and commitment that exists within us all. They want us to sound like waves of killer bees who are swarming to particular environs with the sole goal of bursting the religious right's bubbles.
It is deeply offensive. And while groups like Focus on the Family may have been the ones to declare this hurtful and unnecessary "culture war," lifting the veil off of the dehumanizing rhetoric that fuels it is what will ultimately lead our side to victory!
Offensive, but not surprising. Again, it's the dehumanising tactic. FOF can't afford to acknowledge gay affection and attachment as real, but they have to come up with a reason why so many gay couples have got married in Connecticut.
And linking it to the Powerful Gay Agenda is the icing on the cake.
Posted by: Baron Scarpia | Nov 17, 2009 10:53:59 AM
I really have forgotten my evangelical roots. I can't remember what it felt like to wake up every morning and hate the world. I need to remember to ask my home church sometime how all that animosity is working out for them.
Posted by: Eric | Nov 17, 2009 11:03:06 AM
Every time I see your pictures Jeremy, it makes me smile. I'm so happy for you guys.
I don't understand their logic. How are we forcing our lives on others? All we are fighting for is to live our lives, to have equal rights and that includes being able to get married.
At least, its nice to see that they aren't using same-sex marriage in quotation marks.
Posted by: Sam | Nov 17, 2009 12:20:36 PM
I'm with Sam.
I have had the good fortune to attend a few same sex weddings. As evidenced by a lot of footage from weddings performed in states where it was legal, a lot of the couples weren't young.
Most of them together for decades.
It is offensive, VERY offensive that FOTF, FRC and so on are SO reductive in their descriptions of gay people, let alone couples.
And in ways too, that are offensive to STRAIGHT people as well.
Such as in the case of reducing marriage and it's legitimacy ONLY to the matter of procreation and who has the organs to do so.
As a woman who lost her reproductive organs, that I'd be relegated in such a way demeans me.
And as for gay parents, this statement demeans their entrance into parenthood and their children.
Regardless that by definition, it takes a GREAT deal more thought, care and expense to do that whether biologically or by adoption.
Something that many heterosexuals cannot claim, and have no wholesale discrimination or scrutiny against them, regardless of how many fail in their duties as parents or spouses.
It is wicked to say bald faced that gay people 'don't want marriage and only want to do so to harm children.'
All the while considerable expense, energy, sacrifice and obvious duty TO a significant other and shared parenting says just the opposite.
The opposition puts a lot of words and deeds in the mouths and hands of gay people. Does a lot of speaking about gay people as if the most credible and expert on the intents of gay people.
And tells the public that gay people are the only liars, the only ones who can't be trusted, that even discussions about gay people to children threatens those children.
Everything is hijacked and reduced.
Once, I asked a woman if she'd accept a man lecturing her on how cramps and menstruation feels. Talking down to her as if her child bearing experience was more worthless, than what HE could say about what giving birth felt like and the motives for women competing with men for higher education and parity in the world.
She asked me why.
I said because she'd just spent the last ten minutes talking as if she was an expert on being gay and what gay people did and what they wanted.
And so what would she think of the man talking like that?
She said he'd be stupid and it would be impossible for him to know better than she would.
I gave her a VERY pointed look and said...'exactly'.
She just looked at me for about three seconds,then the light came on and she said 'oh'.
I told her, it doesn't make straight people look to smart speaking about gay folks in such a pejorative way and contradicting or denying what gay people say, even to their faces.
If she wouldn't appreciate what a man like that would do, think, THINK before she did that to a gay person.
She said she was Christian.
I said yeah, and again, Bible abuses against people who are DIFFERENT isn't new, but does that mean you're not allowed to THINK?
Even against your better experience, against your better instinct to LISTEN?
Against your motivation to challenge what you've been TOLD and what to THINK?
I told her all it does it look weak and stupid to me.
And I get embarrassed when straight people do that.
And it's worse when they demand to make decisions FOR gay people for the same reason.
What kind of rational behavior is that?
I told her I wasn't telling her WHAT to think, just that we're better served listening to the voice of experience and reason, rather than that of people who expect us not to.
This is one of the approaches I have with the discussion, however uncomfortable it is for people to realize, they really don't think at all.
And Jeremy, you and Andrew are a handsome pair of fellas any family would be proud of.
I want all my friends to have what you have...
It is, after all, something worthy of sharing.
Posted by: Regan DuCasse | Nov 17, 2009 4:47:19 PM
You two look so wonderfully happy.
I'm bored with FoF. Thing is, these people have been saying the same boring thing for years. Hate isn't creative. Never has been, never will be.
I love to see two men in love. Or two women in love. Or a man and a woman in love. There's something simply lovely about love. :)
Posted by: Em | Nov 17, 2009 5:29:51 PMcomments powered by Disqus