RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: TLC to air show about humans' ability to suppress truth in name of religion » AFA, LaBarbera think being publicly pro-gay is still a liability; how quaint » Video: Blended family with lesbian moms heads Tylenol holiday ad » NOM's new conspiracy theory: Census Bureau making changes to hide marriage equality's ill effects » 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  

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

10/17/2012

The National Organization for [forced, 'natural' reproduction]

by Jeremy Hooper

Thomas Peters heads up the National Organization For Marriage's long-gestating "Next Generation For Marriage" project. That being the case, it's pertinent for all to know that if we are to follow young Thomas' thoughts to their logical end, it's more than just same-sex couples who should fear what NOM has planned for this phase two operation:

Screen Shot 2012-10-17 At 4.24.44 Pm
[SOURCE]

Okay, so first—if you're familiar with Twitter, I encourage to read the replies to Thomas' tweet. His supporters are saying things like "bestiality is natural too," working overtime to go after the idea that homosexuality is both natural and acceptable rather than what seems to be Thomas' larger point about reproduction. The feedback really gives you insight into what the NOM Cultural Director's rhetoric cultivates among his supporters, intended or not.

But that aside, I can't help but marvel at the continued attempt to position reproduction as the Achilles Heel by which NOM will ultimately "win" this war. In a world where reproduction is a wholly non-required element of the civil marriage contract, this attempt to define a couple's marital worth by how many kids they produce from the union of their gametes is beyond the realm of even logical fallacy. I'm sure that most people who give even have a thought to the reality of marriage as it exists rather than the talking points about marriage that the NOM have little to no trouble understanding that the government's recognition of a couple's "I do-ing" does not hinge on said couple's procreative need and/or ability. And I'm also pretty confident that if the NOM crowd overplays this more-than-fallacious hand in the dictatorial way that people like Thomas seem to be itching to do, they are only going to turn off a greater number of heterosexuals who are starting to see just how overreaching (and startling) the far-right's dictums are getting.

Pagebreak-163

*Want to support this site and its mission? You can purchase or download Jeremy's book here (no reproductive mandate attached).

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