« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
08/18/2010
Alliance Defied: Fun!
Oh, it just gets better and better. The Alliance Defense Fund and the Liberty Counsel are still in a public war of words that essentially boils down to "I know you're anti-gay, but what am I?" vs. "My bias can beat up your bias":
But Matthew Staver, chairman of the LC, denies that that the CCF had worked against Proposition 8, and told LSN that there were two reasons the ADF opposed LC's intervention.
"First was a misplaced idea of competition or domination of the case," he said. "And second, a desire to narrow the defense so as not to focus or even address the consequences of homosexuality and homosexual marriage."
"We wanted to include that as part of our defense," he continued.
According to Staver, the ADF "basically gave away the essence of the case, because they wanted to shy away from homosexuality and really were not willing to take the issue directly head on."
The ADF wished to stipulate, he said, that counseling some homosexuals to change could be harmful, that homosexual partners form long and lasting relationships, and that homosexuality does not impair any area of life. Liberty Counsel was not willing to do so.
...
"We would have called a number of witnesses who have high credentials in the area of homosexuality and homosexual behavior, marriage, and reparative therapy," he said.
He said that he had spoken to a number of well-known experts on homosexuality whom the ADF did not decide to contact. "None of them had even been called," he said. "They were shocked; we were shocked."
Staver believes that addressing the negative aspects of homosexuality is "a very critical component to the case, as to why same-sex marriage would ultimately harm marriage."
The ADF nevertheless "completely refused to put on that kind of testimony," he said.
ADF & Liberty Counsel at Odds over Prop. 8 Trial [LifeSite]
(H/t: Scott Hutcheson)
It's interesting, because Liberty Counsel seems to represent what the anti-gay side would like to say about us. The kind of stuff that they do say about us in press releases and conferences and radio shows where they primarily need to rally their base, not the general public. The type of messages that we see on protest signs.
ADF, on the other hand, is presenting that nice, buttoned down image. The face they use in elections, when national camera crew are around. It's the difference between the Tony Perkins who says we are "held captive by the enemy" while speaking to local churches, yet would never even consider saying as much when appearing on "Face The Nation."
One side is convicted enough to stand for their incendiary, condemnatory beliefs regardless of fallout. The other is savvy enough to recognize the intense hurt, condemnation, and fallacy that punctuates the "pro-family" world. In terms of sheer respect, we actually have more for the former position than we do the latter. At least that crew more readily owns their mud and stones. The other team tries to say those same substances are really fertilizer with which they'll grow roses and bricks with which they can build bridges.
**EARLIER: Eating their pwn: Liberty says Alliance Defense FAILED [G-A-Y]
It really is Friday the 13th: We're admitting MassResistance is right about something [G-A-Y]
Your thoughts
comments powered by Disqus
