RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

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

09/16/2011

Peter Sprigg says Prop 8 witness proves gays can change; proves why his side does so poorly on (and fears) witness stands

by Jeremy Hooper

Sandy Stier, one of the plaintiffs in the Prop 8 trial, was once married to a man. So according to the Family Research Council's Peter "I'd prefer to export homosexuals" Sprigg, that "proves" that gays can "change":

Usually, when homosexual activists are promoting the “born gay, can’t change” myth, they trot out people who say, “I’ve known I was gay all my life.” Yet their plaintiff in this landmark court case admits that she did not “learn” that she was “gay” until her “mid-thirties.” This is an astonishing admission.
Prop 8 Trial Transcript in the Spotlight: Plaintiff Destroys “Born Gay, Can’t Change” Myth (Part 1) [FRC]
(h/t: Zack Ford)

Forget bisexuality. Forget people who live man/woman lives because of ease or status quo fulfillment. For Peter, a later-in-life realization is simply "proof" that homosexuality is a light switch -- one that should always default back to Screen Shot 2011-09-16 At 4.58.36 Pm'ro.

The interesting thing to me about claims like this from people like Peter is that they always overlook the most obvious assumption here, which is that people like Sandy Stier are probably *more* in touch with their sexuality than others. People like me, in fact. I dated several young women when I was but a pup and my conservative southern background and family structure pressured me into doing so. Because of this earlier experimentation, I can say with more certainty than some others that I am not, in fact, attracted to females in that way. Because it's not an unknown for me: I've tested it. Fully. Foolishly.

But again, none of this matters to Peter. Whether in one's teens, twenties, thirties, or whenever, if one has been with someone of the opposite sex, then that was what they were meant to have done, no matter how wrong it may have felt. Period. Case closed. Jury's reached a heterosexist verdict.

Fortunately for us, the court of Peter "I support criminal sanctions for homosexuality" Sprigg is not the court of law. In actual court, Sandy Stier's reality gets the respect it deserves.

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