Misunderstanding about the "Right's" Opposition to Same-Sex "Marriage"
This NY Times article completely misconstrues the meaning behind the "marriage movement." he thinks that most people opposed to gay marriage think that homosexuality itself is a sin and a disease. I have only encountered one person in this battle who thinks that, and that one person was quickly chastised by the President of the Alliance Defense Fund, the biggest pro-family "conservative" legal organization in the country.I mean, he's pretty honest, but then there's this quote:
"At its essence, then, the Christian conservative thinking about gay marriage runs this way. Homosexuality is not an innate, biological condition but a disease in society. Marriage is the healthy root of society. To put the two together is thus willfully to introduce disease to that root. It is society willing self-destruction, which is itself a symptom of a wider societal disease, that of secularism. "
I guess I would change the wording to "homosexual lifestyle." I don't care if homosexuality is genetic. Frankly, it makes no difference. Genetic predispositions can't make the action itself right or good. And how about this quote, saying the same sort of thing:
"For them, the issue isn't one of civil rights, because the term implies something inherent in the individual -- being black, say, or a woman -- and they deny that homosexuality is inherent. It can't be, because that would mean God had created some people who are damned from birth, morally blackened."
I do not think that those prone to homosexuality are any more "damned from birth" than I am. Who was this guy talking to, anyway?? I mean, he was right about some things, but I don't like the picture that this article painted of the pro-marriage activists. I welcome comments on this article...
posted by Becky @ 10:05 PM
7 Comments:
At its essence, then, the Catholic Supernatural Rabbit Scribe's thinking about gay marriage runs this way: Same-Sex Attraction Disorder may or may not be an innate, biological condition. For that matter, it may or may not be rooted in environmental conditions wholly beyond the individual’s control, such as childhood trauma. Either way, it doesn't matter as far as gay marriage is concerned. Homoerotic behavior is a sin primarily destructive to the individual and family, and secondarily to society at large because it's scandalous. The human family, headed by a man and woman joined in licit marriage, is the foundation of society. To re-define marriage is ultimately to re-define the family; this willfully introduces disorder to our foundation. It is society willing self-destruction, which is itself a symptom of a wider societal disease, that of liberal modernism and consequent secularism.
For him, the issue isn't one of civil rights, because while the disorder may be inherent in the individual, like being black, say, or a woman, the behavior isn’t, and he denies that civil rights have anything to do with behavior. The behavior can't be inherent, because that would mean God had created some people who are damned from birth, that God’s grace is insufficient. Supernatural Rabbit Scribe’s best friend suffers from the disorder, and he is celibate, holy, and just an awesome example of the power of Jesus Christ to conform the sinner to Himself day by day and hour by hour. Anybody who says Supernatural Rabbit Scribe’s friend shouldn’t, for example, be trusted around kids is cruising for a bruising, but gay marriage- ixnay.
Nice. Thanks for the comment. I agree completely.
In 1934, I battled the predecessor Supernatural Rabbit Scribe atop the Eiffel Tower. I thought I had the upper hand as I had the higher ground, and rabbits (even supernatural ones) are close-range fighters. Dammit if he wasn't a Rabbit at all but a porcupine! Well, I have to say that's one battle I never forgot. Still, I made up for it during the Cultural Revolution when I mercilessly dethroned the reigning Kumite champ - a four foot tall Gerbil named Maximillian Copurnicus - he did not have quills. The supernatural rabbit, incidentally, finished 12th in the competition, but then, he wasn't exactly in his prime anymore. I think he fought for the free six night stay at Best Western Shanghai.
Andrew....you always write very interesting things...
Oh, for the love of Pete. I’m not a porcupine, I’m a Supernatural Rabbit Scribe. I recorded the deeds of ancient Maya gods and nobles on ceramics and in codices. Here’s a self-portrait- I’m ground level, front and center:
http://www.misericordia.edu/users/davies/maya/prince.jpg
So, here’s where the porcupine thing comes in: the central praxis of the ancient Maya religion was bloodletting. On certain astronomically significant occasions, the male nobles would pierce a very private, personal, and above all, sensitive portion of their anatomies with a thorn, stingray spine, or, yes, a porcupine quill. The blood would be collected in bowls filled with paper on which the prayers of the faithful were written. The paper would be dried and burned and the prayers thus ascend to the gods. The bloodletting itself, combined with ritual drug use, produced visions which guided the affairs of state. I recorded bloodletting scenes innumerable times, and the nobles were always like, “Dude! We spaced out and forgot the thorns and spines and quills and stuff! Come back in seven years and we’ll have it together!” They never seemed to forget the drugs, though. Cheeky so-and-so’s, lounging around sucking up cacao while everybody else busted their humps, then copping a sneak when it came time to do their bit. I took to carrying some porcupine quills around with me, so I could be like, “Here you go, got you covered. Now get on with it.” I could never quite make out what they mumbled before the howling started, but I assume they were thanking me for my thoughtfulness. Heh.
So anyway, as Andrew so sensitively observed, I’m well past my prime, being about sixteen hundred years old. Furthermore, we were in France, which always leaves a bad taste in my mouth, and he’s a bloody filthy fighter. So I figured, “What the hay- I’m gluing these porcupine quills to my fur- I gotta snag every advantage I can get here.” Fat lot of good it did…
The part about Maya bloodletting is true, and art historians do call the fellow on the vase a supernatural rabbit scribe.
Weird- blogger messed up my link.
misericordia.edu/users/davies/maya/prince.jpg
I said your predecessor was a porcupine. You would do well to learn more about your sacred elders, yougn'n.
Post a Comment
<< Home