RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: Voices from our pro-equality future (present?) » Anti-gay orgs continue to offend children of single parents, gay parents, more » Apple CEO gives 'substantial' sum to HRC's southern state project; may or may not have used ApplePay » Conservative proposes new way for vendors to tell gay customers they don't care for them » NOM versus David Koch » Anti-equality baseball player calls reporter 'a prick' for asking about his anti-equality advocacy » Audio: Josh Duggar defends discrimination, invalidates own point » Audio: AFA's Fischer names 'homosexual agenda' as 'greatest threat to liberty' in American history » Audio: AFA Radio caller calls for executing gays; FRC-employed host doesn't even challenge him, much less condemn » NOM president's other organization is 'in trouble' (his words) too  

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

05/04/2010

Audio: Show 100% based on personal *faith* attempts to define 'real'

by Jeremy Hooper

Roback-MorseSame-sex marriages are not real marriages? Gays can marry, just not each other? Anti-equality voices are the ones playing defense? If gays, why not two brother marriage?

Dr. Jennifer Roback Morse of the Ruth Institute (an official NOM affiliate) and her friends at "Catholic Answers Live" are hauling out all of the nuggets:

(click to play audio clip)
*SOURCE: 4/28 - Morse [Catholic Answers Live]

Yea, and I have a deeply spiritual connection to the love and embrace of the full natural spectrum -- where's my key to the dictionary of acceptability?

***

**SEE ALSO: Check out even more "lock solid" analogy from the Ruth Institute's blog:

An analogy: a square has four equal sides and four right angles. That’s what MAKES it a square. Society can try to say, “Oh, that’s not fair! What about this shape over here with only three sides? Why can’t it be a square, too? Let’s pass a law and say that a three-sided figure is now a square.” But it would still be a triangle."
Redefining marriage doesn’t change the truth [Ruth]

The obvious problem in this "logic": Gays aren't trying to change the shape of things. Our rings are just as round and our deserved piece of the pie is just as triangular. Social conservatives like Morse and Co. want the freedom to set one historically malleable civil template in stone so that it leaves out anyone whose configuration they personally find unsavory, almost always using their chosen faith views as the primary basis. And that's just not a view that should fly within this odd and irregular shape:

Outlineus-1

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