« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
06/18/2008
Writing with flawed-point Penna
The following fear-mongering comes courtesy of Baptist Press columnist Penna Dexter:
Homosexuals, seeking marriage, say it's their "right." But as homosexuals attain the "right" to marriage, the institution itself loses its distinctive definition as the union between one man and one woman. And, in bestowing marriage on same-sex couples, the court has created other losers, in particular any children of those couples.
Additional losers are:
-- The family. "Gay marriage" in European countries shows us the redefinition of marriage will weaken the family structure.
-- The taxpayers. We will subsidize the fallout from family disintegration.
-- Democracy. "Same-sex marriage" comes to California and beyond because of a court decree, not the vote of a legislature or the people.
-- The church and free exercise of religion. I believe churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples or who preach that homosexuality is immoral eventually will lose their tax-exempt status, or worse. Religious businesses-owners will be forced to hire and retain gays.
Our truth-mongeiring reply:
-Just because you all keeping saying that "one man one woman" is the definition of marriage, it doesn't make it so. Our definition of marriage very much includes same-sex couples. And we're not the only ones. Merriam-Webster, an outfit that knows a thing or two about the meaning of words, is also now including same-sex couples in the marital picture.
-Even if you think gay marriage will corrupt other kinds of children, how can you possibly argue that it will harm the children already being raised by same-sex couples? That's just an absurd argument. Same-sex-headed families are already in place. Bestowing marital rights and benefits upon same-sex parents will only ensure their family's protection.
-The European disintegration argument is SO tired. Studies show that marriage, for a variety of reasons, was on the decline in these nations well before same-sex marriages were legalized.
-If Bob and Tom's marriage is going to destroy your family or your marriage, then your problems run deep. Get yourself to family therapy/marital counseling ASAP!
-How offensive for heterosexuals suggest that same-sex marriage causes a tax burden. Homosexual tax dollars have been subsidizing heterosexual marriage (and its fallout) for eons. What's good for the citizenship-holding, straight goose is good for the citizenship-holding, gander-loving gander!
- As for the democracy argument? STOP OVERLOOKING THAT THE CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE HAS TWICE APPROVED MARRIAGE EQUALITY! The people have spoken through their elected reps!
-Two words, Ms. Dexter: CIVIL MARRIAGE. For the ten billion and sixth time, we are not talking about religion here! You all are the only ones bringing up religion in the fight for civil equality! As it is now with atheist, interfaith, or non-member couples, the churches will have to decide for themselves whether or not they choose to recognize same-sex marriages on religious grounds.
-Informed by your definitions of "winners" and "losers," Ms. Dexter, we are at this time vowing to never play Monopoly with you.
FIRST-PERSON: Calif. threatens marriage nationwide [BP News]
Your thoughts
Hey, Jeremy,
bravo, Bravo, BRAVO! This was so succinctly and eloquently stated. I can't believe the fear mongering these "good people" try to spread. Good Grief - have they never heard of "Thou shalt not bear false witness!"
Posted by: Tom | Jun 18, 2008 10:25:14 AM
"And, in bestowing marriage on same-sex couples, the court has created other losers, in particular any children of those couples."
Well, that really burns me up. Our children aren't losers by any stretch of the imagination. One is in grad school and one is in college. Our daughter seems to have a very happy marriage. I guess the right-wingers might consider them losers since they have grown up to be fair minded individuals.
Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Jun 18, 2008 11:22:14 AM
She forgot to add herself to the loser list.
And, good Lord, what happened to that woman's hair?
Posted by: dave b | Jun 18, 2008 11:55:11 AM
wonderfully put Jeremy. When will they stop this tired old rhetoric and listen to another point of view? They might just learn something.
Oh, and dave b
- I believe the 80s happened to her hair, dear, and I'm quite sure it didn't survive.
Posted by: m-no | Jun 18, 2008 1:48:05 PM
m-no, you are correct.
You're a pearl! :)
Posted by: dave b | Jun 18, 2008 8:12:15 PM
Penna: "I believe churches that refuse to marry same-sex couples or who preach that homosexuality is immoral eventually will lose their tax-exempt status, or worse."
As a Mormon could I have sued the church if refused to let me marry a person of another religion in their temple - No.
Racial and religoius discrimination in government and business has been outlawed for decades, but many racist groups continue to exist, enjoying freedom of speech and tax exemption. Why does Penna think it will be any different when equal marriage rights are extended to same-sex couples.
I'm confident that like the Aryan Nations and KKK, Penna and Co. will be free discriminate for many decades to come.
Posted by: GayMormonBoy | Jun 18, 2008 8:34:43 PM
Anyone with that hairstyle cannot expect to be taken seriously. It looks like someone spattered a football helmet
Posted by: Jason D | Jun 19, 2008 10:17:06 PM
comments powered by Disqus
