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 »

12/19/2011

George Mason School of Law or Jackie Mason School of Comedy?

by Jeremy Hooper

George Mason Associate Professor Helen Alvaré has some bizarre opinions about the "earthquake" that is marriage equality. Here's some of what she shared with Focus on the Family:

Same-sex marriage proponents like to align themselves with victims. But Loving v Virginia didn’t give marriage to an interracial couple because they were victims—it gave it to them because they were a man and a woman who’d been denied marriage on the ridiculous grounds of race. Every time same-sex Alvare Hmarriage proponents tell people that marriage is utterly unrelated to children but strictly about a feeling, they are destroying the poor, the uneducated, and the formation of their family lives. Don’t tell me you’re in solidarity with them when your argument is destroying their lives.
...
The people who are suffering with the worst ability to get jobs right now are the ones suffering when we don’t help them link their children to their parents and their men to their women, etc. But same-sex marriage proponents are saying none of this matters. All that matters is this romantic feeling between two people, ignoring two centuries of family law.

I’m really hopeful that when this comes before the Supreme Court, it will look to its history. I will absolutely write an amicus brief. When you get down to brass tacks, we have to keep adult men and women together. We do not need to overthrow marriage and babies and the male-female relationship in order to address discrimination against people with same-sex attractions.

“How does my gay marriage hurt you?” Every single argument you had to make in order to make your gay marriage legitimate in the eyes of the law is one that had to discount the importance of the male-female relationship, ignore completely the good of children, and is at the heart of poverty, high rates of imprisonment, educational failure and intergenerational cohabitation among our most vulnerable communities. That’s how it hurts other people. Children and communities on the edge.
...
Despite all our cogent arguments, valid data and ringing truth, we have 50 years of deconstructing marriage, so same-sex marriage now appears like just another tiny marginal move in the wrong direction vs. the earthquake that it really is. No-fault divorce, cohabitation, abortion, out-of-wedlock pregnancies, new reproductive technology — now this seems like just another tiny thing.

Helen Alvaré [Focus on the Family's Citizenlink]

Gays' relationships are an "earthquake" that's "destroying the poor, the uneducated, and the formation of their family lives"? Oh, and we're thoroughly obliterating male/female relationships by virtue of our own shake at marital recognition?

"Damn, I wanted to be this month's biggest fantasy," said Santa Claus.

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