RECENT  POSTS:  » Man who insinuated it's better to be thrown into sea than support homosexuality attended #SB101 signing ceremony » Considering vast (and frankly odd) amount of time he spends talking about us, no wonder Tony Perkins thinks we're 'special' » FRC keeps lying about where majority of Americans stand on marriage equality » Audio: Indiana restaurant owner openly discriminates against gays, glad to have added protection to do so » Indiana legislature, Gov. Pence awaken a fierce, powerful, anti-discrimination giant » Eleven Republican US Sens. give anti-gay conservatives a taste of a near and less divisive future » NOM proudly touts #March4Marriage backers who believe homosexuality 'should be treated by society as immoral, dangerous perversion' » Video: Gee, with compelling videos like this one, I just can't imagine why the anti-gay right is losing in court » #TBT: Even after legal equality, Americans—and particularly religious Americans—struggle to accept certain marriages » Indiana threatens its commerce, tourism dollars, reputation, general welfare of its citizenry  

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


Video: The focus is on gays but the narrow parameters cast wide net

by Jeremy Hooper

It's apparently not just same-sex couples that socially conservative figureheads like Jennifer Roback Morse of the NOM-affiliated Ruth Institute want to civilly shun. No, no -- it's also any opposite-gendered couple or heterosexual individual who is engaging in the "kind of crazy biotech things we're doing" in order to conceive:

Now, take out the bottom line, which is that reproduction is not a civil marriage requirement, and therefore cannot be used against anyone in either the court of law or the court of public opinion to oppose one certain kind of group's civil equality. Also overlook the indisputable truth that gays and lesbians do have children that they ably raise. The fact of the matter is that for folks like Ms. Morse, the "culture war" is not against just against same-sex couples or same-sex marriage: It's against anyone whose situational reality does not match the two parent, heterosexual, able to conceive without outside assistance, faith-based, properly gender-roled paradigm that they wish to impose on all of society, even though it doesn't match actuality. They are just gunning for LGBT rights in particular because that's what they know they can get away with at this time. We're the low-hanging fruits in this godly garden.

Even if one shares Ms. Morse's Catholic-steeped goal for the world, the reality is that the model does not match the full span of physical existence. Our public policy is to acknowledge our known realm and to shape rights and benefits and protections around the same, not to let certain religiously-mandated wishes exclude those they deem to have missed the mark. We would actually respect Ms. Morse more if she were out on the front lines, lobbying on the state and federal level for laws that require children as part of marriage, that outlaw divorce, stop fertility methods, and secure a host of other things that she seems to view as righteous protections of the family. But she is not doing that. She is using this myth of "acceptable" family to stop one vulnerable population and one vulnerable population only: LGB couples who pay the same taxes and contribute in the same way as their heterosexual neighbors, yet whose own familial bonds are left out to suffer a whole slew of legal storms in ways dissimilar to their fellow citizens.
At least that's what she and Maggie Gallagher, Brian Brown, Robert George, et. al, are doing for now. Tomorrow, it just might be those who benefit from the "kind of crazy biotech things we're doing" whose lives and families are laid out before the public so that any and everyone can gauge their supposed fitness.

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

Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails