RECENT  POSTS:  » No, you really don't seem to know what tyranny is, Jerry Cox » Vatican's #Humanum event meant to paint gay families as 'evil' and 'obscene,' admits invited guest » Read: Federal judge calls MS's marriage ban what it is: discriminatory » Yet another federal judge accurately notes crude discrimination within Arkansas' marriage ban » Prominent conservative outlet equates LGBT activists with Nazi paramilitary » New pledge: Conservative pastors choose to separate selves from civil marriage » Read: ADF creates fake 'victim' superbook; misapplies business matters to churches » P&G reaches out to pro-discrimination activist, learns it made right choice » In prep for Pope's 2015 visit, World Meeting of Families readies gay stigma, exclusion » Today in ambition: NOM cofounder vows to fight marriage equality for 100 years  

« 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