RECENT  POSTS:  » 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' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way  

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

04/16/2014

More animus from Texas' key 'protect marriage' guy

by Jeremy Hooper

Saenz Whenever Texas' marriage debate comes back in the spotlight, as it did earlier this year, Jonathan Saenz is the one man who the local media outlets bring on air and in print to represent the opposition. And of course Jonathan, like most everyone who speaks to the mainstream press in favor of what they call "traditional marriage," pretends that his opposition is limited, practical, and focused. He never admits it's because he's anti-gay, instead saying his views come from him being "pro-marriage."

It's crap. Here's Jonathan describing an event that Texas A&M is hosting to celebrate graduates who happen to be L, G, B, or T:

"This special Texas A&M ceremony essentially promotes and celebrates dangerous and risky sexual activity that can fiercely jeopardize a person's well-being"... "I'm not sure this is the most responsible way for a university to prepare students for the real world." [ONN]

"[D]angerous and risky sexual activity that can fiercely jeopardize a person's well-being." That is what he thinks of homosexuality; that is why he opposes our rights. Period. There is really not much that needs to be said beyond that. If a person believes, like Jonathan does, that LGBT people are wrong and broken and in some sort of moral and/or physical danger simply because we are LGBT, then there is very little chance that this person is going to offer any measure of support for our inclusion or protection.

This is the crucial piece of the puzzle that far too many are missing. Or excusing.

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