Chuck Norris Likens Prop 8 Fight To Anarchy

Huckabee-supporting martial artist Chuck Norris has written his latest column for townhall.com on the passage of Prop 8 in California, calling demonstrations in its wake "anarchy." The article, entitled "If Democracy Doesn't Work, Try Anarchy," ends with the following:

The truth is that the great majority of Prop. 8 advocates are not bigots or hatemongers. They are American citizens who are following 5,000 years of human history and the belief of every major people and religion: Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman. Their pro-Prop. 8 votes weren't intended to deprive any group of its rights; they were safeguarding their honest convictions regarding the boundaries of marriage.

On Nov. 4, the pro-gay community obviously was flabbergasted that a state that generally leans left actually voted right when it came to holy matrimony. But that's exactly what happened; the majority of Californians -- red, yellow, black and white -- voted to define the margins of marriage as being between one man and one woman. California is the 30th state in our union to amend its constitution in doing so, joining Florida and Arizona in this election. Like it or not, it's the law now. The people have spoken.

Read the whole thing here

Comments

[RealHRCFansVoteObama]

Coming from a guy on his second marriage, discussions of the sanctity of the institution really mean a lot.

Is Prop 8 the only thing 'protecting' his marriage?

He does realize that in the last 5000 years the definition of marriage has been whatever society has deemed it to be, including multiple husbands or multiple wives.

[Woodn88s]

Let's face fact......­Anyone who takes issue to giving equal rights to another human is nothing more than a person who does not believe strongly enough in their own convictions.
They live in fear.
Norris lives in fear so he makes a living kicking a$$
What is the big deal, if 2 gay people want to get married, let them, who cares.....­....
How in the world is 2 gay people getting married going to affect your union as man and wife?
Only in your fear world

[Skootermarx]

Only after he appears on the Actor's Studio should we consider Chuck's political insight. Go break another brick with that rapidly aging forehead, Chuck. No cred.

The last laugh is on us. We empowered this cretin with box-office revenues and infomercial slime. Think of Skreech, the Olson twins, et al. Turn off the glass teat. Read. Think. Evolve.

[DrDemon]

"Like it or not, it's the law now. The people have spoken."


-- > Supreme Court Will Speak Soon Enough...

THEN WHAT- LOL! YOU'LL SEE A RETRACTION!

[MarceloAbans]

So if things don't go the way that a particular likes all that is needed is temper tantrum? This happened as a result of lack of organization, period. Nothing is ever given to anyone, you need to get it.

[DrDemon]

Well I hope there is "great organization" when this case is presented to the Sup Ct.

[JimboSlice]

Chuck who? Never heard of this guy, but he kinda looks like a dude I saw Bruce Lee beatdown in a movie.

[cdbk]

Funny,good movie too,the Chinese Connection.

[bushgirlsgone]

.

Nosferatu lives!
.

[Meah]

Chuck Norris who?

[Pynenut]

5,000 years of human history? Are you kidding? Science has determined that homo sapiens has been around for at least 200,000 years. Take your fundamentalist, "man battling dinosaur" fairy tale back to your narrow minded church and keep it there. And while you're at it, get your GED.

[Pynenut]

5,000 years of human history? Are you kidding? Science has determined that homo sapiens has been around for at least 200,000 years. Take your fundamentalist, "man battling dinosaur" fairy tale back to your narrow minded church and keep it there. And while you're at it, get your GED.

[harriettubman]

That's the point. There are those with beliefs you will never change.

[marquitin]

The simplest solution is for the State to issue Civil Union licenses to all who desire them, and then for churches to issue a separate marriage license to whom they wish to marry. Parishioners are free to choose the church they wish to attend . Churches are free to marry them or not. Everyone is protected, everyone should be happy. Keep the State out of the religious semantics business.

[Hawka]

I agree with most of this, except the marriage license bit. We should keep such issues completely separate and not give legal power to churches anymore at all. A certificate of some sort as proof to the couple (whether gay or straight) themselves and the church should be enough but I don't think it need be legally recognized under the system, they're mostly just ceremony anyway to be left up to the eyes of God or what have you.

[goldbry]

That's the way it is already. You have to get a license downtown, and then you can have the added Church ceremony if you choose. Homosexuals just want the downtown (ie, government) part to be available to them, as legal citizens of this country. As it should be. The churches can keep their exclusionary ceremonies for themselves.

[lmvd3]

BLECHHH! Disgusting. Does he realize how ugly he is? All the hair dye in the world won't help him look more than the backwards caveman that he is.

[RRonin]

These turkey-necked fundamentalists conflate a legal contract (the state issued marriage license) with a church ritual. And they think that if gay's can marry, they would sue churches to perform said marriage rituals for them. The question is, why would they? Why would they want to be married in a church whose members despise them? That makes no sene.

[EvoMan]

Bloody idiot. Basing marriage on 5000 years of human history. One could make the same argument about slavery.

[dcjdjay]

This patriot and Christian with a capital C obviously loves marriage. Which is why he's had a few of them himself. And while he was busy celebrating marriage between one man and one woman, he was off begatting spawn with a woman who was not his wife. That's mighty Christian.

[rnelsonbrown]

The assumption here is the 'sacred' and the 'holy' bit. The use of sacred, the holy, is just dogma poop! You can't define marriage as sacred and holy in an arguement as though it is an established fact, when we all know that it isn't anything more than a hotly contested issue between all sorts of factions, religious or otherwise. That's a straw man. What the hell makes marriage sacred other than one religious bias or another? Separation of religion and state Mr. Norris. Remember? It's in the constitution.
This debate is not about anarchy, it is about biased elitism vs constitutional rights. Wake up Norris, and smell the community made coffee. Try sharing the american dream instead of trying to keep it to yourself. What's next, murder rights for Christians who 'believe' in an 'eye for an eye?'

[kothian1]

I'm not taking Chuck's side..but the anarchy he is referring to is the incidents of vandalism and assault that he mentions at the beginning of his article. All I want to know is...did they actually happen as he reports them? Or are they being exaggerated or made-up? I haven't seen much here on the subject. Are some of the protests turning violent? The GLBT will only weaken it's just case if the incidents that Chuck refers to are indeed occurring. Anyone?

[Meah]

Vandalism does not equal anarchy.