Individually, we are one drop.
Together, we are an ocean.
Ryunosuke Satoro
Earlier One-Off Post: SCOTUS, Baby Veronica and a Rant
Cato Institute,"Marriage Fight Moves Back to States": Thumbs DOWN!
First, I really have little interest in constantly writing about the gay "marriage" issue. From the figures I've seen, just under 1 in 20 Americans are gay, and very few have long-term, stable, monogamous relationships. Plus, as I have repeatedly mentioned, there's a difference between non-interference in gay relationships, a principle I support, and redefining an institution that is tied to procreation and sustainable society.
But I find that other opinion writers or talking heads keep raising talking points. In the cited interview, there's a discussion of the interviewee's ACLU gig of marketing gay "marriage" to Tea Partiers. He starts talking about building a bridge--"everyone knows a gay person" and build on the "fairness" issue in gay "marriage". I found this a shocking bad, simplistic, condescending assessment. First, I don't have gay acquaintances (at least that I am aware of), but I can say with absolute certainty if any combination of nieces and nephews came out to me, it would have absolutely no change on my position. My love for them would not change, and I would wish them happiness in finding a compatible relationship and might even attend a commitment ceremony, but unlike Cheney and Portman, it doesn't affect my feelings about an institution that has a history of thousands of years across cultures and religions.
Second, for those of us Tea Partiers based on principles of limited government, we want government out of the marriage business; at the least, we want marriage regulation at the state level, not federal government. We also tend to see judicial tyranny in terms of how courts thew out two passed California state propositions on traditional marriage.
Third, the broader Tea Party coalition includes social conservative allies. If you go to one pop Tea Party portal (tpnn.com), you will find a number of cross-linked stories reflecting a pro-life or pro-traditional marriage perspective.
Finally, what is being described is more of a general strategy, not Tea Party specific. Tea Party members are highly principled activists. There might be alternative approaches that might be more acceptable to discuss gay issues with Tea Partiers:
- get government out of the personal relationships of gay people
- privatize marriages
- limit federal involvement in any state regulation of marriage
- let the states compete for gays through relevant policies.
A lot of talk last Sunday on the gay "marriage" issue. Ted Olson and Nancy Pelosi were promoting the incoherent view that gays are "discriminated" against in marriage. Let's go over this one more time: marriage is a distinctly heterogeneous institution that has evolved over thousands of years: it is tied to the procreation of children. (So help me if I hear one more pseudo-intellectual thinks himself clever for noting not all married couples are fertile, say, where either partner is sterile or post-menopausal...The point is marriage is the social normative context for procreation, and procreation cannot occur within the context of a gay relationship; there is no need from the perspective of societal sustainability for a gay-based institution.) This is a hardly "discrimination"; it's a matter of the nature of procreation itself. In many cultures there's a social stigma associated with an illegitimate birth, i.e., a bastard. This stigma has no reference in the context of a gay relationship.
So let's stop pretending that marriage is some vast straight conspiracy. It's not like we invented marriage 20 years ago to exclude gays. For some reason, gays want to co-opt the term 'marriage' to promote social acceptability of their relationships. This reflects more the insecurity of gays in their own relationships, that they are dependent on heterosexual approvals.
Another annoying talking point: the inevitability of gay marriage. First, let us recall that in only 3 of the states that approved gay marriage were done at the ballot box, and the highest approval was 53%. Over 30 states have voted no, I believe by an average approval of 57%. A lot of support comes from young adults whom have been swamped by popular cultural groupthink on the issue. As others have pointed out, people's views on abortion have gradually become more pro-life than in previous periods; I suspect we'll see the same on gay "marriage".
Atheist Monument?
 |
| Courtesy of allproudamericans |
Political Cartoon
 |
| Courtesy of Lisa Benson and Townhall |
The Beatles, "I Should Have Known Better"
