RECENT  POSTS:  » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices  

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

07/15/2010

Audio: 'Public purpose' talk's nothing more than Morse code

by Jeremy Hooper

Roback-MorseEarlier today, we mentioned how Dr. Jennifer Roback-Morse told Maine's NOM tourgoers that we gay people are turning marriages into nothing more than friendship. Now, audio:

(click to play audio clip)
*AUDIO SOURCE: Ruth Institute

If you Google "public purpose of marriage" you'll find nothing but socially conservative manifestos (or sites linking to them). In just a five minute search, we found Peter Sprigg, Maggie Gallagher, Glenn Stanton, and of course Morse herself all using this "public purpose = attaching parents to children" line. That's because this one definitive definition of marriage one and only purpose is a complete right wing construct! Period. It's a convenient talking point that they want to turn into a concrete reality. And since it's based around children, the vulnerable and much beloved beings that the vast majority of us want to safeguard, they know that they have built in mileage that will do have of the work for them, especially with lazy thinkers who'd rather be led than lead.

In obvious truth: People have been marrying for all time for all kinds of reasons independent of children, and the civil marriage contract involves a myriad of things that have nothing to do with the non-requirement that is child rearing. These reasons are also not all based on personal whim, even though that's the idea that Morse uses as the straw man coin-flip for anything that involves marriage but does not revolve around heterosexual coitus. She tells you all this abject B.S. because the "pro-family" movement's way is not to let you think or experience or delve into archival truths for yourself. They don't want you to look at what's ailing us and come up with true solutions. They don't want folks to accept responsibility for actual failings of modern marriages. Instead, they want to tell you that there is one and only "public purpose" that must exclude gay people, in hopes that you'll just throw up your hands and give in to their attempts at controlling America's bedrooms and ring fingers.

DON'T. BUY. IT. FOR. A. SECOND!

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