RECENT  POSTS:  » But does the Archbishop even believe in gay? » Video: Move over aliens, plagues, Sharknados—it's committed gays who'll soon kill Western Civilization » Nine former water-carriers for 'ex-gayness' join all credible scientists in denouncing 'ex-gay' propaganda » The operative word is 'yet' » Video: Tony Perkins for politically-driven pastors to test (if not run afoul) tax exempt status » Ruth Institute (former NOM affiliate): Same-sex marriage is as much of a wedge as interracial marriage bans » NOM finally admitting that marriage amendments are, in fact, bans » Kentucky's big anti-LGBT org hopes to pray away a fair court ruling on civil marriage » Iowa's governor sponsoring anti-gay Family Leader summit? » Head of Virginia's top anti-gay org: One mean email proves 'the left' is sexist, intolerant  

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

02/27/2012

NOM pushes 'cultural vandalism' claim; I say 'yes, please do!'

by Jeremy Hooper

On NOM Blog, the writer is pushing the former Archbishop of Canterbury's claim that same-sex marriage is a form of "cultural and theological vandalism":

Screen Shot 2012-02-27 At 11.28.56 Am
[NOM Blog]

It's really dumb of NOM to do this.

We are at a point in the debate now where most every American has had a chance to see a married same-sex couple. Whether it be in the media or closer to home, almost everyone has experience with the idea of two human beings of the same gender sealing their bond in love. At one time, the idea was much more theoretical. Now it is not. It is in our culture.

So now, when groups like NOM propagates phrases like "cultural vandalism," it's starting to sound nastier and nastier to more and more people. Vandalism is a term we use for things (homes, land, businesses). The instruments of vandalism are harsh (spray paint, rocks, baseball bats). By fostering this kind of term for a debate that's becoming more human by the day, NOM is willfully attaching its resistance movement to cold, uncaring, inhumane, misplaced rhetoric. For a debate as dependent on the so-called movable middle as this one, it's really doltish for the team that's already contending with claims of animus to further dehumanize their efforts.

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