Via NoFo:

Every argument against marriage equality is horseshit

While it has yet to articulate a single argument against marriage equality that meets basic standards of plausibility or verisimilitude, the gay discrimination industry has coughed up a litany of anti-equality arguments designed to appeal to the gullible and the intellectually compromised. These arguments get parroted about so frequently that even thinking people start to become inured to their irrationality and ridiculousness.

Fortunately, none of these arguments could survive the academic scrutiny of a marginally sober third-grader. In the best light, they’re just hollow platitudes. In the worst, they’re vile, desperate lies. And if you ever get caught in a conversation with a discrimination parrot—or if you want to defend marriage equality in an angry blog post or a letter to the editor—feel free to steal the simple refutations below with complete impunity.


Gay marriage will destroy the sanctity of straight marriage
Wrong. Britney Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage destroys the sanctity of straight marriage. Rush Limbaugh’s three temporary marriages destroy the sanctity of straight marriage. John McCain dating and proposing to his second wife while still married to his disfigured first wife destroys the sanctity of straight marriage.

We can’t redefine marriage
• The concept of “redefining marriage” is a linguistic distraction designed to pull the spotlight away from the underlying hatred behind “traditional marriage” propaganda. Giving gay people equal access to the rights and protections of marriage will not change the definition of marriage. Nothing about gay marriage alters heterosexual marriage. The definition of marriage between heterosexuals will remain exactly the same.
• If we hadn’t redefined marriage in the 1960s, Barack Obama would still be a bastard in the 19 states that wouldn’t allow the interracial marriage of his parents when he was born.
• Ronald Reagan, the divorced patron saint of the modern conservative theocracy, redefined marriage into something temporary and easily revocable in 1969 when as governor of California he signed the Family Law Act, leading the United States into an era of no-fault divorce.
• Other historical “redefinitions” of marriage involve the transition of marriage from a business relationship between families to a property relationship between a man and his wife and then to a relationship based on relative equality between a man and a woman.

Marriage is the foundation of society
One could argue that the true foundation of society is a successful public health policy. Or a working economy. Or an equitable system of education. Whether marriage—specifically heterosexual-only marriage as this argument goes—is also some kind of "foundation" depends on a broad range of definitions of foundation. In any case, this argument is little more than a hollow platitude designed to sound meaningful when other arguments against equality implode for lack of substance.

Homosexuality is not natural
Wrong. Since it occurs randomly in nature across all species without any identifiable outside influence, homosexuality is completely natural. Religion, on the other hand, is created entirely by the human imagination. Which makes it, by definition, unnatural.

Americans think gay people are gross
Americans think obese parents, pregnant teenagers and Rush Limbaugh are gross. And they’re allowed to marry as often as they want.

Gay marriage teaches children it’s OK to be gay
Exactly. Just as organized religion teaches children it’s OK to embrace the supernatural over the real. And there are no laws against that.

I shouldn’t be forced to explain gay marriage to my kids
An unwillingness to expose children to the diversity outside their family is no justification for denying adults equal access to financial and legal protections for their own families.

Marriage is designed to produce children
No it’s not.
• Straight marriage laws carry no reproduction requirements.
• If they did, infertile or menopausal people wouldn’t be allowed to marry.

Children deserve a mother and a father
That's how they're usually made, yes. But since marriage is not contingent on producing children—and vice versa—this argument is just an emotional-heartstrings-flavored distraction deployed to change the subject when other anti-equality arguments are exposed for their implausibility and desperation.

Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to men marrying dogs
No it won’t. And anyone who makes this imbecilic argument is not emotionally or intellectually fit to participate in any conversation that affects public policy.

If we allow men to marry men …
The slippery slope argument uses wild conjecture in place of reason and fact, making it the last vestige of the intellectually desperate. Since it’s based on nothing but imagination, the arguments can go in an infinite number of directions. And these arguments are easily trumped: If we allow people to vote on gay marriages, we’ll have to allow people to vote on marriages between adulterers and divorcees. If we allow Christian mythology to influence our laws, we’ll have to allow Wiccan theology to influence our laws as well. If we follow Christian mandates on marriage, we’ll also have to follow Christian mandates on adultery, divorce and the subjugation of women.

The institution of marriage is under attack by gay people
No it’s not. Gay people want to emulate marriage. The only people attacking the institution of marriage are the people currently allowed to be married: heterosexuals who divorce or commit acts of domestic abuse and adultery.

Marriage should be decided by the states
No it shouldn’t. Speed limits should be decided by the states. Sales taxes should be decided by the states. School calendars should be decided by the states. People’s relationships, legal protections and tax benefits shouldn’t change when they drive across state lines.

Marriage should be decided by voters
No it shouldn’t. Individual marriages should be decided only by the two people entering into them.

Gay people don't deserve special rights
Equality is not a special right. Calling it a "special right" is an ugly distraction tactic designed at best to pull focus from the underlying hatred behind anti-marriage-equality arguments and at worst to mislead and inflame the passions of gullible, low-information voters.

We should just agree to disagree
People “agree to disagree” about frivolous things like music or sports teams or religious beliefs. The active denial of legal equality is not frivolous; it has real consequences for real families. Either you’re for marriage equality or you’re against equality. There’s no room for friendly disagreement in the equation.

No offense, but I don’t think gay people should marry
Believing that one class of people does not deserve equal protections under the law is extremely offensive. Especially when there is no logical, rational or even plausible reason for your belief.

I don’t hate gay people—I just believe marriage should be between a man and a woman
Denying people equality for nothing more compelling than “belief” is a form of hate. If you work to marginalize gay people, it doesn’t matter whether you act out of malice or selective interpretation of religious dogma. Either way, you are endorsing a system designed to hurt people.

Defending marriage is not hate
Wrong. Calling hate "defending marriage" is the most vile, cowardly, deliberately misleading form of hate.

I don’t believe in the homosexual lifestyle
Good. Because there is no such thing as a universal homosexual lifestyle, just like there is no universal heterosexual lifestyle or Christian lifestyle or atheist lifestyle. The “lifestyle” argument is nothing more than a gross overgeneralization built on the implication that gay people are all whores, and it’s used to demonize us in an attempt to justify denying us legal equality.

Marriage is a religious institution
No it’s not.
• Marriage licenses and marriage certificates are issued by governments, not churches.
• If it were, we wouldn’t allow atheists to get married.
• If it were, we wouldn’t allow people to get married by a justice of the peace. Or a ship’s captain. Or an Elvis impersonator.

Gay marriage is not compatible with religious belief
Gay marriage may not be compatible with selective interpretations of some religious traditions. But that has nothing to do with marriage equality. People are certainly free to embrace any religious beliefs they choose. But those beliefs apply only to their believers, and they end the moment they begin to hurt people who choose not to embrace religious theories. An elective belief in a trendy mythology does not give anyone moral authority to deny basic equalities to other people.

Homosexuality is a sin
Only to those who choose to believe in religious dogma. And religious dogma—especially when it’s used to victimize an entire class of people—is not appropriate in a discussion of legal equality.

Churches shouldn’t be forced to perform marriages they don’t approve of
They won’t. Churches have always been free to refuse to marry anybody for any reason they dream up: divorce, adultery, religion, race, gender … even basic family snobbery. On top of that, most marriage equality legislation to date includes language specifically permitting churches to continue to engage in this discrimination.

Being forced to accept gay marriages is a form of discrimination
No it’s not. This meaningless argument is simply a distraction tactic designed to make bigots look like victims.

Domestic partnership is the same thing as marriage for gay people
No it’s not. Many rights bestowed on straight married people by institutions ranging from the IRS to insurance companies to private employers are denied to gay people in domestic partnerships. Marriage by any other name is simply not marriage

Make the jump here to read the full post at NoFo

Via JMG

PhoboQuotable - Michael Carroll

"I see no purpose in extending a societal imprimatur – and not insubstantial benefits – to folks whose relationships are of essentially no societal consequence. Taxpayers should not be in the business of subsidizing friendships, however close. Only when people enter into a relationship which presumptively involves the bearing and rearing of children does society have an interest in that relationship." - New Jersey Assemblyman Michael Carroll, explaining why he has joined the Alliance Defense Fund in their challenge to Lambda Legal's marriage equality lawsuit against the state.

reposted via JMG

Via JMG: The Real Life "English Patient" Was Gay

Newly discovered letters have revealed that Lazlo de Almasy, the Hungarian soldier who inspired the Best Picture Oscar-winning romance/drama The English Patient, was gay in real life. He never slept with a woman and he was in love with a Nazi.

Letters have surfaced in Germany proving that the World War Two spy who inspired the hero the the Oscar-winning film The English Patient was no womaniser but a gay man in love with a young soldier called Hans Entholt. The correspondence also indicate the Hungarian-born adventurer Count Laszlo de Almásy did not die of a morphine overdose after suffering terrible burns and dreaming of the woman he loved, the fate the befell the fictional hero played by Ralph Fiennes in the film. Instead Almásy succumbed to amoebic dysentry in 1951 never having once slept with a woman. While the Imperial War Museum in London holds reports he wrote for German intelligence in WW2 under lock and key, letters written by Almásy, who worked for Rommel's Afrika Corps, have been found in Germany, confirming the long-time rumours about his sexuality.

Almasy's lover Hans died when he stepped on a German land mine.reposted from JMG

From JMG: World Net Daily Lies About ENDA

The nation's most widely read conservative/Christian site issued yet another of its classic lies today, claiming in a headline that the Employment Non-Discrimination Act requires employers to hire gays. The site makes no substantiation of the claim in their story.

Now that the health-care fight has proven House Democrats can muscle through legislation without a drop of bipartisan support, plans are underway to resurrect a bill that would make employers susceptible to lawsuits for refusing to hire "gay" or transsexual employees. H.R. 3017, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act of 2009, or ENDA, makes it unlawful for government agencies or businesses with more than 15 employees to refuse hire or promotion of anyone based on "gender-related identity, appearance or mannerisms or other gender-related characteristics of an individual, with or without regard to the individual's designated sex at birth." The bill does make exceptions for the U.S. military, religious organizations and some businesses with non-profit 501(c) designations, but makes no provisions for business owners' consciences. A small construction company that wanted to maintain a Christian reputation, for example, could be sued if it refused to hire transvestites. Openly homosexual members of the House, enthused by the health-care victory, are now looking to return from the congressional recess to begin work on ENDA.

ENDA, of course, would create no "requirements" or quotas for employers regarding LGBT employees. It merely says that sexual orientation and gender identity cannot be a factor in making hiring, firing, and promotion decisions. World Net Daily goes to the usual whiny asshats for quotes:

"This bill would unfairly extend special privileges based upon an individual's changeable sexual behaviors, rather than focusing on immutable, non-behavior characteristics such as skin color or gender," said Shari Rendall, director of legislation and public policy for Concerned Women for America. "Its passage would both overtly discriminate against and muzzle people of faith. "Former Secretary of State Collin Powell put it well when he said, 'Skin color is a benign, non-behavioral characteristic. Sexual orientation is perhaps the most profound of human behavioral characteristics. Comparison of the two is a convenient but invalid argument,'" Rendall quoted. "Over the years, the homosexual lobby has done a masterful job of co-opting the language of the genuine civil rights movement in their push for special rights," explained former CWFA Policy Director Matt Barber, who now serves with Liberty Counsel. "This bill represents the goose that laid the golden egg for homosexual activist attorneys."

World Net Daily previously claimed that the now-passed Hate Crimes Act would bar the prosecution of child molesters, dubbing the legislation "the Pedophile Protection Act."via JMG

We Give Damn

We Give a Damn Campaign

Give a Damn Campaign PSA
Uploaded by trentisthenewpink. - Explore more family videos.

VIA JMG: HomoQuotable - Dan Savage

"Three shark in attacks in Florida, million of sharks in the ocean, and no one will go in the water. Hundreds and thousands of children raped in churches and people still send their kids to church. It's crazy. You should be sending your kids to gay bars. There they will be be safe." - Dan Savage, speaking on his latest podcast.

reposted from JMG

Via JMG: Gen. Paul Eaton Endorses DADT Repeal

Retired U.S. Army Gen. Paul Eaton, who lead the invasion forces in Iraq, has strongly endorsed the repeal of DADT. "Discrimination based on sexual orientation is inappropriate in our society." Listen to the entire clip, the guy knows his stuff. Easton's son is a third generation West Point graduate now serving in the infantry.

a repost from JMG

What Kind of Planet Are We On?

Great Kids!

Via JMG: Animals Are Gay, Part II

Two elderly male otters died within an hour of each other at a New Zealand zoo yesterday. Handlers say that the second one probably died of heartbreak after watching his mate pass away.

Zookeeper John Miller said the Asian otters, who were 19 and 16 years-old, had been best friends for 15 years. It's thought that having each other for company kept them alive beyond the normal otter life-span of 14 years. According to handler Gail Sutton, the pair lived to nearly 100 in human years. 'They were a great pair of otters, they were interested in what was happening,' she said. The pair had been unwell for a couple of weeks but after completing treatment they were returned to their enclosure, only to be discovered dead the next morning. 'We were devastated and we couldn't work out quite what had happened with them,' Ms Sutton said. 'It brought a tear to my eye and it's making me well up now.' 'The only consolation from this is that they both went together because if one had gone without the other, the remaining one would have been really lost.'

Sniff.reposted via JMG

Via JMG: Concerned Women Are Concerned That Gay Kids Don't Get Beaten Enough

Concerned Women For America have issued an endorsement of the plan for Christian children to walk out of school during GLSEN's Day Of Silence.

The pro-homosexual "Day of Silence" (DOS) is coming to your child's school again. The nationally scheduled date is April 16, 2010. While wearing the mask of a "safe schools" program, this is actually a movement to silence any criticism of homosexuality. It is a homosexual activism day. Day of Silence is sponsored by the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) and was created by GLSEN's founder and former Executive Director, Kevin Jennings. Jennings now heads the Safe and Drug Free Schools Program at the U.S. Department of Education. The Day of Silence is just one of the homosexual indoctrination programs operating in our schools.

"Gay" students and teachers are asked to go the entire day without speaking as a protest to the bullying and harassment students receive over their "sexual orientation." This is a manufactured crisis of violence upon gender-confused students. Adult homosexual activists have manufactured it to promote a political agenda, but instead they are ruining young lives, putting children at risk because of deadly behaviors, and forcing gender confusion on the vulnerable.

The goal behind the Day of Silence is not to make schools safe but to silence Christian voices and the voices of those who do not approve of homosexuality. Students who do not support homosexuality have a right to say that sex between two males or two females is repulsive. They also have a right to say people aren't born homosexual without being called bigoted or hateful.

Among the Christian groups endorsing (PDF) the beating, bullying and torture of LGBT youth: American Family Association, Americans For Truth, Liberty Counsel, Mission America, MassResistance, PFOX, and many others.

GTEI NYC--Show that started at TOSOS to move to Broadway

From Joseph:

I belong to the Gay Theatre and Performance Arts Networking Group in NYC.. so I got this today..
Joseph

Click on the link.. the show about two soldiers in love... seems wonderfully written..

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/31/yank-to-move-to-broadway-next-seaso/?scp=1&sq=yank&st=cse

Via JMG: Quote Of The Day - Iowa Gov. Chet Culver

"We stood firm for the civil rights of every Iowan by saying loudly and clearly that any and all efforts to add discriminatory amendments to our state constitution have no place in our state constitution. Regardless of our personal views, we have a line that needs to be drawn between the executive branch and the judicial branch and I think Iowans are ready to move on and accept that unanimous decision." - Iowa Gov. Chet Culver, congratulating the state legislature for refusing to consider a constitutional amendment overturning same-sex marriage. This week is the one year anniversary of marriage equality in Iowa.another great repost lifted from JMG

Via JMG: The 2010 Peter LaBarbera Hate Challenge

"The folly of the SPLC’s expanding 'hate' dragnet is that it threatens to engulf all religious/moral opposition to homosexuality. Indeed, it would be revealing to query the top 25 'GLBT' activist across the nation and ask them if they would also label, as Matt Barber pokes fun HERE, the following as 'hate groups': Family Research Council, AFA, the Roman Catholic Church, Focus on the Family, the Southern Baptist Convention and ADF. Wayne Besen, Evan Hurst, Joe Jervis, Jeremy Hooper, Rea Carey: take up the challenge!" - Peter LaBarbera, in his seventh consecutive post whining about being named a hate site by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Since you asked, Petey, yes, I do consider your named groups to be hate-centered. Therefore I accept your challenge to help you expand the SPLC's list. It's clear that you want more company on that list in order to take the sting out of your having been singled-out, so let's try to make the hurt go away. In alphabetical order and just off the top of my mind, here are some asshat groups whose campaigns of oppression and hate are just as evil as yours.

The 2010 Peter LaBarbera Hate Challenge!

The following evil and hate-filled organizations devote a large amount of their time and resources to thwarting the civil rights of LGBT people in the United States. They do this through lies, slander, buying politicians, and the demonizing of LGBT Americans in the public's mind.

Alliance Defense Fund
American Family Association
Americans For Prosperity
Catholic League
Center For Military Readiness
Christian Coalition
Concerned Women For America
Eagle Forum
Exodus International
Family Policy Network
Family Research Council
Family Research Institute*
Focus On The Family
Heritage Foundation
Illinois Family Institute
Maine Family Policy Council
MassResistance*
Morality In Media
NARTH
National Organization For Marriage
Parents & Friends Of Ex-Gays
Parents Television Council
Protect Marriage
Liberty Counsel
Repent America
Republican National Committee
Roman Catholic Church
Traditional Values Coalition*
(*Already listed by SPLC.)

I'm sure I've made a few glaring omissions for this list. Readers, feel free to suggest others.

a repost from JMG

Via JMG: Animals Are Gay

This weekend's feature article in New York Times Magazine deals with homosexuality in the animal kingdom. Here's an excerpt:

Various forms of same-sex sexual activity have been recorded in more than 450 different species of animals by now, from flamingos to bison to beetles to guppies to warthogs. A female koala might force another female against a tree and mount her, while throwing back her head and releasing what one scientist described as “exhalated belchlike sounds.” Male Amazon River dolphins have been known to penetrate each other in the blowhole. Within most species, homosexual sex has been documented only sporadically, and there appear to be few cases of individual animals who engage in it exclusively. For more than a century, this kind of observation was usually tacked onto scientific papers as a curiosity, if it was reported at all, and not pursued as a legitimate research subject. Biologists tried to explain away what they’d seen, or dismissed it as theoretically meaningless — an isolated glitch in an otherwise elegant Darwinian universe where every facet of an animal’s behavior is geared toward reproducing. One primatologist speculated that the real reason two male orangutans were fellating each other was nutritional.

In recent years though, more biologists have been looking objectively at same-sex sexuality in animals — approaching it as real science. For Young, the existence of so many female-female albatross pairs disproved assumptions that she didn’t even realize she’d been making and, in the process, raised a chain of progressively more complicated questions. One of the prickliest, it seemed, was how a scientist is even supposed to talk about any of this, given how eager the rest of us have been to twist the sex lives of animals into allegories of our own. “This colony is literally the largest proportion of — I don’t know what the correct term is: ‘homosexual animals’? — in the world,” Young told me. “Which I’m sure some people think is a great thing, and others might think is not.”

Wingnut logic: Homosexual acts are not natural! Then why do so many animals do it? What are you, an ANIMAL? Well, yes.

a repost from JMG

Via JMG: Everywhere But Here

The percentage of people saying homosexuality is "never justifiable" is diving in all the countries surveyed. Including here, until starting around 2000, thanks to Karl Rove and the Bush II years. Still, I suppose we should at least by heartened by the overall change since the survey began.

(Via - Andrew Sullivan)

a repost from JMG

Via AccessHollywood: Ricky Martin: 'I Am a Fortunate Homosexual Man'

Posted Mon Mar 29, 2010 2:48pm PDT by Access Hollywood in Stop The Presses!

NEW YORK, N.Y. -- After years of keeping quiet about his personal life, pop star Ricky Martin has announced that he is gay.

"I am proud to say that I am a fortunate homosexual man," Ricky said in a message posted on his offical Web site. "I am very blessed to be who I am."

make the jump here to read the full article

Via JMG

Tales Of The City Musical To Get San Francisco World Premiere

The musical version of Armistead Maupin's Tales Of The City will see its world premiere in San Francisco next summer.

"Tales of the City," a new musical adaptation of Armistead Maupin's famed stories - created with veterans of "Avenue Q" and members of the rock band Scissor Sisters - will receive its world premiere in the American Conservatory Theater's 2010-11 season. Bill Irwin, Harold Pinter, and a new take on Sartre's "No Exit" are also featured in the ambitious lineup to be announced today by Artistic Director Carey Perloff, along with the previously announced, three-theater staging of Tarell Alvin McCraney's "The Brother/Sister Plays" trilogy.

"It's a wonderful valentine to the community in which we live," Perloff says of "Tales," noting that Maupin began his opus as a series of columns in The Chronicle. It's the kind of San Francisco story, like her own "The Tosca Project" this season, "that's a big part of the kind of work we want to make at ACT." Perloff acknowledges that "Tales" has Broadway aspirations, with the participation of "Avenue Q" librettist Jeff Whitty and director Jason Moore, and Scissors songwriters Jake Shears and John Garden. But the premiere "is an ACT production for ACT's audience," she says. "Clearly it's an extraordinary team, and it would be surprising if it didn't have a longer life. But that isn't the first imperative, which is to do a fantastic production for a fantastic city."

Like uncountable thousands of gay men, I decided I needed to live in San Francisco once I read the first volume of Tales In The City. And in 1994 I practically tackled Armistead Maupin for an autograph in the middle of Fifth Avenue as he lead the television cast of Tales Of The City to their place in the Stonewall 25 Pride parade. He kindly introduced me around and to this day I can't even remember meeting anyone else. Laura Linney? Olympia Dukakis? Who knows? Today's bonus cool points: Both Maupin and Avenue Q's Jeff Whitty are JMG readers. another repost from JMG