An Exercise in Discerning Befuddled Liberal Thinking
Yesterday, thankfully, the voters of Maine joined voters in 30 other states to defeat “gay marriage”–for those of you scoring at home, this is 31-for-31 when it is put to a vote, rather than decided by mindless legislatures and power-hungry courts. But what I want to point out is the horrific reasoning that is being employed by supporters of “gay marriage”, as evidenced in this simple Fox News article:
Maine Voters Reject Gay Marriage Law
The reasoning is so transparently juvenile that grown people ought to be embarrassed by what is coming out of their mouths…but if you want to play along, go to the article and pick out the different instances of silliness for yourself. Go ahead, I’ll wait…OK, got your list? Let’s go down it together!
Here’s Jesse Connolly, manager of the campaign to get this atrocity legalized:
“We’re in this for the long haul. For next week, and next month and next year — until all Maine families are treated equally. Because in the end, this has always been about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.”
1. All Maine families are treated equally, already.
2. It’s never been about “love and family”–it’s about the radical redefinition of two things: one, a “family” into “whatever definition we want it to be”, and two, “marriage” into something other than it’s existed in almost every culture known to man from time immemorial (granting the occasional aberration).
“Our relationship is between us,” said Carla Hopkins, 38, of Mount Vernon, with partner Victoria Eleftherio, 38, sitting on her lap outside a hotel ballroom where gay marriage supporters had been hoping for a victory party. “How does that affect anybody else? It’s a personal thing.”
OK, no problem with that; it’s a free country. Why are you, then, trying to make it something other than a “personal thing”, in such a way that if affects everybody else (in Maine) in a massive way? I mean, did dear Carla say this with a straight face? How can she possibly, possibly not see the incredible irony of her words?
Another Portland resident, Sarah Holman said she was “very torn” but decided — despite her conservative upbringing — to vote in favor of letting gays marry.
“They love and they have the right to love. And we can’t tell somebody how to love,” said Holman, 26.
OK…your point, dear Sarah? Leaving aside the whole “love” thing, how in the name of Olympia Snowe is preserving the traditional definition of marriage “telling somebody how to love”? It seems a dangerous, dangerous thing that people without better reasoning skills than Sarah have a vote in the first place.
I’m left to wonder if this indicates a profound failure of our public school system in teaching people how to think–or if it’s a credit to the gay lobby’s massive propaganda machine (abetted by the lapdog media, of course) in so confusing the issue that people have begun to believe down is up and up is down. Regardless, it’s scary that so many people don’t have the capacity for reasoned argumentation anymore, relying instead of slogans and silliness. God help us…I mean it.
Just a question on the “full faith and credit” aspect- if a same-sex couple did go through a legal marriage in one state, would the state they move to have to recognise it as a valid marriage?
@Graham: I don’t believe so, but it seems like that very question is headed (at least eventually) to the Supreme Court.