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 »

03/13/2012

Audio: Accurately labeling the MN For Marriage campaign is a 'rhetorical tactic'?

by Jeremy Hooper

I am beyond tired of this kind of justification and the ease with which its conscience-clearers state it:


SOURCE: Jason Adkins [MN Catholic Conference]

The speaker is Jason Adkins, one of the top leaders of the current, so-called Minnesota For Marriage campaign. That campaign is working to limit marriage, specifically because they fear what same-sex couples will supposedly do to the institution. They are not pushing a divorce amendment. They are not pushing a steeper punishment for adultery. They are not pushing a requirement that demands reproduction as a marital must. This coalition is engaged for the one purpose of stopping same-sex couples in Minnesota from earning the freedom to marry.

In the rest of this speech (which can be watched in three parts here), Adkins uses the word "attack" umpteen times. In fact, at one point he even says that it's not just marriage that is under "attack," but rather civilization itself. And in every instance, it's always the matter of marriage equality for same-sex couples to which he affixes the "attack" label. And yet here we have Adkins, a self-proclaimed moral values guy who works for the Minnesota Catholic Conference, seriously telling us that this proposed amendment, because it doesn't contain the word "gay," is not aimed for the one, glaring purpose that is so obviously driving it? That is so offensive on so many levels! It's offensive to gay people, obviously, who not only have to endure these public onslaughts, but also have to watch as their self-appointed adversaries work to wash their hands clean of the hurt they are causing us. But it's also offensive to the everyday Minnesota voters, who deserve accurate information about a ballot measure they have been asked to weigh. If those who brought this to ballot cannot have the fortitude to stand for equality, they could at least have enough grit to take ownership of the divisiveness they've so proudly wrought.

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