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 »

03/06/2014

It's crazy rhetoric like yours that's helped move polls, Matt Barber

by Jeremy Hooper

In a new article on the American Family Association's One News Now site, the anti-LGBT group gives rabidly anti-LGBT voice Matt Barber a platform from which to opine on the most recent polling showing broad support for marriage Screen Shot 2014-03-06 At 8.31.47 Amequality. And while Matthew blames Hollywood and propaganda for swaying the polls, he completely ignores a really key factor—even while he himself is giving voice to it.

Here's a pertinent snip:

Barber tells OneNewsNow: "To say that they could have even conceptualized same-sex marriage, much less imagine that there was some kind of constitutional right for sodomy-based marriage, is the ridiculous assertion to radically deconstruct and redefine the institution of marriage."

Barber points out if there is such a right, then there is also a right to incestuous marriage, polygamy, and marriage between an adult and a child .
[SOURCE: ONN]

The factor Matt misses, of course, is the extreme rhetoric that he and his cohorts have been using for the past two decades, mistakenly believing it's a pragmatic way to connect with the American public. Stuff like equating our marriages with incest and pedophilia or belittle our unions as "sodomy-based," while a gross and sad reminder of the cruelty (and insecurity) of the human mind, has surely been good for at least five points in our rapid poll climb (if not more).

Let me be clear: marriage equality would happen even if our opposition operated in good faith, because marriage equality is right, fair, and constitutionally sound. However, had the other side chosen to engage in grownup conversation rather than define its movement with fear mongering hyperbole and mean spirited demonization, I'm not sure those of us who value the freedom to marry would've reached the right side of history as fast as we have/are/will. Folks like Matt Barber have shown the American public the clear contrast between our peaceful movement and their proudly discriminatory one. The rhetoric that has come to define the "protect marriage" (gag) movement is nasty, hostile, crass, and crude. The American public is sick of it. Because it's sick.

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