American Exceptionalism includes gay folks
Once again I had to hear from Tony Perkins all about how I’m a horror to the nation. It’s getting tiresome. This time he was joined by Republican Congressman Trent Franks from Arizona. Here, lets look at what they had to say – with my charming annotation.
Arizona Rep. Trent Franks has said that gay marriage threatens the nation’s survival.
Oh really? How? He can’t say with any cogency, that’s for sure. But now I’m an enemy of the nation? Yikes! Well, there’s already gay marriage and civil unions in some places – nothing much seems to have happened in those places. But lets go to the full logic of this man’s statement – does he truly believe that somehow – what? All the good heterosexuals will run off to be gay? Does he think that the government will fall and some other form of government will be instituted? Does he think that the 320,000,000 Americans will all go away? Does he believe the all of a sudden the nation will rise up and chuck the constitution and the financial system and the cellphone networks? Can we really be this important to the nation – and that only harassing us will hold the place together?
Does he think all the heteros will stop schtupping each other? What could he mean by “survival”? And can he conceivably believe that a peaceful taxpaying bunch of citizens, no more than 5% of the nation, and often argued to be less, could conceivably do anything to this nation or its survival? And how come they never elucidate their reasoning, except to say, of course, “gay? I wouldn’t be gay!” Yes, well, good for you guys. But what do we have to do with this? How on earth could we threaten the nation’s survival if you said something nice about us? How tenuous is your grasp of your own self, sir?
During an appearance on the Family Research Council’s (FRC) radio program Washington Watch Weekly, Franks told the group’s president, Tony Perkins, that marriage should remain a “special right” for heterosexual couples.
Yes, well, then gays should pay less taxes, hell, no taxes. If we’re to be given no benefits or rights, well, then I dare say, why should we be paying for anything like the divorce courts, the schools, the battered-woman safe houses – we don’t contribute to these problems – why should we pay for them? I don’t know, pro-rate it or something. On the other hand, I thought no one was supposed to have “special rights” – and I thought everyone was entitled to the same thing? Well, alas, though precisely for good reasons, the system is construed to facilitate married couples, and there’s all sorts of automatic things, like when owning a house, or a car, you know, the assets of the marriage, and too insurance, wills, and on and on through life, and even taxes – joint filers get a different rate – well things are automatic – but for gay couples we must contrive them – and contrive we do.
So the question becomes – why do you think the reality of gay couples is somehow going to destroy anything when it hasn’t destroyed anything? Why, gay couples in states without “marriage” get “partnered” through the commercial law. Easy enough to do – two guys in love buy a house as a company – and presto – the government recognizes the couple. Why, with gay couples owning a business, the same things – presto – the government recognizes the partnership. The only thing is that its commercial rather than family – so the idea that gay couples are doing anything bad is nuts, and the idea that moving this all to family law somehow is going to do anything to anyone but make it easier for us is well, just nonsensical. It’s a manufactured fear.
You know, supposedly, according to this man Gary Gates, there are 2,491,034 gay men in the nation (preposterously low and exact, but hey, he’s a demographer!) So that means there could only be something like, oh, 1,245,000 gay marriages – and this is his concern? Supposedly there’s 1.5 million lesbians – and thus could only be 750,000 lesbian marriages. This recognition of reality will somehow imperil the 50,000,000 heterosexual marriages in this nation? Beats me, but there you have it. My, how tenuous is the heterosexual lifestyle that merely recognizing reality is a peril to it.
Franks discussed a recent House hearing he chaired on religious freedom, at which witnesses testified that the nation’s increasing support for marriage equality was eroding freedoms for Christians.
How does it impact religious freedom for Christians? And which Christians? All Christians will remain exactly as they are. No one is requiring any change of religion, nor alteration of it. You can go on believing it is a bad thing to be gay and chase us out of your sanctuaries. There are all sorts of religious beliefs that contradict each other in this nation, but we don’t go making some church’s beliefs the law, do we? I mean, the Amish think electricity is sinful – but somehow I don’t think the nation is imperiled by that small group – the Orthodox Jews think shrimp and pork are sinful, and both these groups have interesting ways to dress up for a day out on the town – does this impact the nation? We are a population measurably the same in size with these two – so how could we impact the nation?
You’d still be allowed to hate us, you’d still be allowed to have nothing to do with us – and indeed, you could still preach from the roof tops that we’re all going to hell – no gay person wants to take away this right of yours to just not deal with us. But you’re religion – not government – and indeed, while you remain as free to disparage us as you wish – you are preventing our religious beliefs – which is that God did make us, and we do indeed have legal issues as couples, and single people, that need to be addressed. But somehow keeping us from marriage doesn’t subtract or add to your religious beliefs, whatever they might be. And indeed, many Christians now have welcomed gay folks into the fold. They have recognized that well, we’re not so bad. So which Christians might he be referring to?
“The federal Department of Justice (DoJ) has ratcheted up its attack on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by mischaracterizing it as an act of bigotry,” testified Rev. William C. Lori on behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. “If the label of ‘bigot’ sticks to our Church and many other churches – especially in court, under the Constitution – because of their teaching on marriage, the result will be church-state conflicts for many years to come.”
Yes, well, the said Act is indeed bigoted – what can one say about a bill that specifically targets a tiny segment of the population and tells them “tough, you’re not allowed to access these and those laws.” I find it astonishing that wife beaters and murderers, the mentally insane and the autistic all can get married, and gays can’t for it’ll do something to these people. There’s no way to explain it with reason or logic, and they fall back on faith. We’re not trying to stick you with the “Label of Bigot” – you are loudly proclaiming your right to be bigoted. We merely agree with you – it’s just plain nastiness towards gay folks. There’s no other word for it.
Many religious people loudly proclaim themselves to want to discriminate against gay folks – I’d say Mr. Perkins constant calling for us to be arrested and incarcerated and forced some alleged “cure” upon me is a certain bigotry. Why, he’s proud of his efforts to disparage and denigrate gay folks. Hell, he makes a living at it. He recommends it to one and all. But no gay man is going to go after the Catholic church and attack it, or sue it – why, we’re trying to get away from you. We’re also trying to convince, of us who are Catholic, our own families and yes, the priest, if he’ll listen, that we are not this God-awful stain upon the nation, but we just happen to have been born gay, that’s all. We’re engaged in trying to convince you to be decent, but have never tried to stop you from saying your mush. And we’re certainly not calling for Mr. Perkins’ imprisonment forever I dare say, like he’s calling for mine, and only because I won’t smooch the way he wants me too, and because he’s afraid of that.
On the program, Franks said marriage should be limited to heterosexual couples because “that is the launching pad of the next generation.”
This one always makes me laugh. How on earth could recognizing gay couples under the law possibly impact the launching of the next generation? We still won’t have kids, marriage or not. We still ain’t making no babies. And no amount of gayness in us will ever impede the heterosexual baby making. Indeed, there seems to be virtually no overall slow down in baby making. From what I’ve been reading in this book on American Exceptionalism (Understanding America, edited by Peter H Schuck & James Q Wilson,) Americans are having babies galore. There’s so many the orphanages and foster homes are filled, there’s so many you folks are killing 1.5 million a year in abortion – none of which are gay related. Babies, in general, are just not a gay thing. Except us adopting the excess, which sounds like a social good, not a threat. Does the good Congressman think that recognizing gay couples will somehow make the heterosexuals stop having babies? That’s quite a leap of fancy, I dare say.
“And when people would come along and blur that distinction and say, ‘Well, that should apply in every way’ it not only is a complete undermining of the principles of family and marriage and the hope of future generations, but it completely begins to see our society break down to the extend that that foundational unit of the family that is the hope of survival of this country is diminished to the extent that it literally is a threat to the nation’s survival in the long run.”
How does forming families undermine families? How does recognizing that the few of us are really gay, rather happy, and form couples possibly undermine family? And we’re a threat to the “hope of future generations”? Really? Why, we’ll be in the future generations just like we are here in this generation. We’re not going anywhere, nor will we ever increase in numbers. Why, heterosexuals make us at a steady clip. The society will break down? We’re so embedded into society now it’s not funny. We have jobs, and own homes, and do things, and create stuff – we are everywhere, and we live, and this is causing society to break down because you say “I see gay people.” Egad, It’s mind numbing.
And if the man is this dense of gay folks, how dense is he on any other subject under the sun? Tony Perkins, well, he’s a gay obsessed certified loon – but for a Congressman to join him in the feeding frenzy is rather disheartening. Why, the man is all but calling me an “enemy of the people” – and perhaps he thinks too, like Tony, that we should be removed from society lest we wreck the place? Is this what we have politicians thinking – the forcible removal of law abiding citizens from society by simply outlawing a form of human? I don’t know, that’s not American. That’s some European mindset of “get rid of those people.” These people are not for Liberty – they are for a police state. And I’m their target. Before they come for the rest of you.
- Posted in: Uncategorized