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 »

12/02/2013

Courts of law, politic, public opinion vs. Court of LaBarbera

by Jeremy Hooper

Professional foe of the 'mos Peter LaBarbera will never, ever, ever, ever, ever accept a same-sex couple's ciivl marriage:

"Even if the numbers do increase, for Christians, the reality is this is not marriage," says Pater LaBarbera of Americans for Truth About Homosexuality.

"It has nothing to do with our Judeo-Christian tradition," he adds, "so this is not marriage and we cannot pretend that this is marriage."
FULL: More homosexual 'marriages' does not more marriages make [ONN]

Peter them dramatically stomped his foot, let out a clearly audible "harumph," then went about his day dreaming up yet another way to convince America that his chosen form of discrimination is, for the first time in American civil rights history, a social good rather than social ill. A real warrior, this one.

Thing is, I don't know one equality activist who has a problem with Peter's thoughts here. None of us are telling him he has to accept same-sex marriages, even if 99% of the population ends up entering one. No one is telling him that he has to see our civil marriages as in line with his personally-held read of Judeo-Christian acceptability. None of us are demanding he accept the reality of civil marriage equality if he and his blind eye want to relegate it to the realm of "pretend." He is 100% free to stand outside of various civil licensing offices in the growing number of marriage equality states (sixteen plus DC!) with crossed arms, shaking head, and "tsk-tsk"-ing lips. One must keep oneself busy.

What Pete cannot and will not do, however, is stop this speeding train simply because he personally wishes it were heading in a different destination. He's been trying to reverse its course for over two decades now. The fact is, Pete and his team lost (or at least is losing and losing hard). That remains empirically true, even if he chooses to pretend our wins are something other than the obvious.

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