RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: Man misapplies personal trauma to sexual orientation science » WND's editor fundamentally misunderstands nondiscrimination law (part 3 of 3) » Video: Why is this shockingly anti-gay (among other things) speech happening in a Connecticut public school? » Fined NY event space to host same-sex wedding receptions (*but no ceremonies for anyone) » Another day, another far-right pastor pushing Christians to civil war » Joseph Farah still clueless about nondiscrimination law » Hobby Lobby president to join extremely anti-gay activists at 'Star Spangled' event » FRC's Sprigg admits his side put up 'weak defense' in 7th Circuit » Photo: The latest totally convincing, in no way silly attempt at a meme from anti-gay Ruth Institute » AFA's Fischer: Time for Christians to 'get up in somebody's grill' like Jesus would  

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

08/22/2013

My marriage is not a 'bad consequence,' Ryan T. Anderson!

by Jeremy Hooper

I am so sick of heterosexual people telling me that my ten-year-going-on-life, monogamous, committed marriage is some sort of consequence of heterosexuals' "bad" behavior. Here's unmarried and Catholic-driven Heritage Foundation staffer Ryan T. Anderson doing just that:

201308220932"It’s also the fact that the past 40 years have been a nightmare for marriage in general. Same-sex marriage is only plausible in a world that has already done so much damage to marriage and human sexuality. The elimination of the male-female aspect of marriage follows the sexual revolution’s train of bad consequences: pornography, non-marital sex, extramarital sex, non-marital childbearing, divorce and so on. Young people don’t hear arguments in favor of the conjugal view of marriage, and they haven’t seen it lived out."

—Ryan T. Anderson, speaking to the Knights of Columbus

Only in a debate as topsy-turvy, deliberately muddied, and purposely delegitimizing as our modern marriage debate could an idea like this even begin to take hold. The folks on Anderson's side of this issue (almost all of them, like Anderson, motivated by personal faith) have worked so hard to turn same-sex couples' loving into committed unions into a kind of weapon that's doing harm to others that no one really bats an idea when we hear a social conservative equating gay people's freedom to marry with things that they consider to be detriments to the institution. We roll our eyes, grown, and push back against the flawed reason, but we aren't surprised to hear it come out of their mouths. This has been their game since the start. Rather than position same-sex couples' marriages alongside their logical counterparts (i.e. opposite-sex couples' marriages) they have spent years insisting—INSISTING!—that our loving unions are instead more like affairs and divorce.

The fact that I even have to dignify young Anderson's claim that my marriage is some sort of byproduct of heterosexuals' own marital behavior is itself deeply offensive. But that he says this sh*t, for a job, as part of a political movement that seeks, as its ultimate dream goal, my forced divorce from my husband? That is downright disturbing. Chilling, even.

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