RECENT  POSTS:  » Read: NOM's guide to pressuring lawmakers to ban marriages (while pretending you're doing something good and positive instead) » Full trailer: 'The Normal Heart' » Vintage Clinton era oppo memo perhaps even more relevant today » Concerned Women For America advises churches to lockdown exclusionary marriage views » Video: What does conservative columnist Cal Thomas see as America's biggest threat? Take a guess. » Correcting NOM's fallacious fear graphic » Gee, Bryan, can't understand why federal courts are rejecting you gay = incest view » Former NOM sr. associate admits shift: Moving away from intellectual arguments, focusing on spiritual » Prop 8 defense attorney now planning lesbian daughter's wedding » If you can't afford your event, NOM, perhaps you should just cancel  

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

10/27/2012

David Parker responds to G-A-Y: 'I stand behind all my positions/comments - except one'

by Jeremy Hooper

Parker3Yesterday, I posted fifteen clips in which the star of all four state's ad campaigns, David Parker, supported the scientifically-discredited "ex-gay" movement, said he sees homosexuality as "bondage," said transgender people are embracing a moral and spiritual lie, accused gay people of using their children and/or families for political reasons, claimed the pro-equality voices who challenge him often possess a "deviant and devious psychology," equated pro-LGBT teaching with a sexual predator in a park, and responded to the fact that Massachusetts has legal marriage equality by saying: "like I said, prostitution is legal in Nevada." (full set can be found here). But of all of those claims (and more) there is only one, his direct assertion that homosexuality is a disease, that Parker is challenging. And only sort of.

Here's what David Parker wrote in response to my post:

Screen Shot 2012-10-27 At 9.33.35 Am

So he, one of the other side's most visible faces in the current campaign, is backing away from the idea that we are a "disease," per se, yet is still reducing our sexual orientations to nothing more than temptations, urges, and attractions. Is that really any better, especially when you couple it with all of the other claims by which he fully stands? The bottom line, still, is that this campaign's most utilized spokes-victim sees our lives, loves, and families as something—an addiction, really—to which we "give in."

WAKE UP, VOTERS. This is not just about marriage. It never had been; it never will be.

Pagebreak-186

*Oh, and as for that "creative editing" claim, which is par for the anti-gay course? Here's what I wrote back to David:

Screen Shot 2012-10-27 At 9.50.36 Am

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