RECENT  POSTS:  » Photo: The latest totally convincing, in no way silly attempt at a meme from anti-gay Ruth Institute » AFA's Fischer: Time for Christians to 'get up in somebody's grill' like Jesus would » GLAAD: The World Congress of Families sparks protests in Australia. Let's examine why. » GLAAD: NOM cofounder: 'Hard to see... the logical stopping place' between gay-affirming, murder-affirming Christians » 'Nonpartisan' NOM's entrenched Republicanism again showing » GLAAD: His other tactics failing, NOM president turns to anti-trans fear-mongering » AFA's Bryan Fischer: Diversity is 'most sinister and dangerous lie' » WND activist: 'Dan Savage has done far worse things than Westboro [Baptist];' says to send him to Iraq to challenge those who hang gays » Michael Sam's teammate offers perfect response to silly shower 'story' » Photo: Negligent NOM posts baby with choking hazard; will someone please think of the children?  

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

06/10/2010

Audio: 'Fool' me once, shame on James Bowman

by Jeremy Hooper

Think marriage equality for same-sex couples constitutes something other than a "drastic or far-reaching change to 'the institution of marriage'"? Well then you are nothing more than a "fool," says a contributor to this Focus on the Family news report:

(click to play)
*SOURCE: Judge Questions Parties in Prop 8 Suit [Focus on the Family]

Well then in that case, Mr. Bowman, "fools" we will gladly be. Because those of us in or around areas where same-sex marriage is a reality 20030418 Jbowman W150 H200-1know that there is nothing drastic about gay and lesbian inclusion into the system. We also know that addition does not equate subtraction. And we know that there's nothing far-reaching about the kind of hand movement that checks two male or female boxes on a licensing form rather than one of each.

In fact, in a world where thousands of same-sex couples are legally marrying without any discernible societal disruption, one can quite easily argue that it's the "protect marriage" proponents who are take the anti-intellectual position here. But we don't have to use ad hominem words like "fool" to assess our opposition. "Wrong" will do just fine.

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