I tend to stay away from arguments for the gay marriage ban based on religious beliefs because I think those who make them have a point. In their interpretation of a 2000+-year-old set of mores set down and rewritten and re-interpreted and re-interpreted and re-written and re-written again, there is a certain group of people who have come to believe that the holy sacrament of marriage should be between a man and a woman. Fair enough. Do I agree with them? Not with a single grain in my soul, but I won't tell them they can't believe what they want to believe--especially within the confines of an institution that is, by the nature of the founding of our country, completely separate from influencing at all the way in which I can legally live my life. Except that it's not. And therein lies the problem with the argument that gay marriage should not be legal. Believe what you want to within your religious institution of living, but don't tell me where my tax dollars can and can't go based on that.
Which brings me to this Big Hollywood post by Sarah Palin's co-author, Lynn Vincent. In attempting to defend her hilarious new author-buddy/athlete, Carrie Prejean, Vincent vehemently insists that neither Prejean, nor herself are "fanatical homophobes." Why? Because they have gay friends. Vincent proves her point in the shocking revelation that Prejean learned how to walk in heels from an "openly gay man."
No. Way.
Totally way. Vincent even goes on to compliment said coach and all gay men by declaring their expertise in wearing heels with this little gem: "Let's face it ladies, nobody can work a pair of pumps like the right gay man." Besides the plethora of ways in which I would like to point out Vincent's shortcomings as a functioning, non-bigoted, reasonable human being with this, the statement's just wrong. No offense to Varla Jean and Hedda, but I've seen Heidi Klum rock a pair of 4 inch stilettos... no contest.
The problem with this line of rationalizing homophobia is that Vincent, Prejean and I'm sure many others, are excusing their fear by admitting that A) they have gay friends and B) they aren't afraid of them. But saying that you aren't afraid of your friends doesn't mean you're not homophobic. Saying you don't agree that gay people have the right to be married does. It's a deeper, much more ingrained sentiment that threatens the institutional beliefs around which you build your life. The prospect of having that upended, be it by friend, family member or stranger, is frightening, but is it cause to close yourself off from even entertaining the idea that your way of life or system of beliefs won't mean anything less if someone you love and care about has the same rights as you? More to the point, it doesn't make exclusionary prejudice legally okay. It's the same thing as saying, "I'm not racist, I have black friends. I just don't believe they should go to my school." Wasn't okay then. Isn't okay now.
(On a sidenote, I'd like to thank you, Lynn, for the enlightening look inside the world of pageantry. Barring any pending Nielsen reports on the demographic of viewers who still watch this archaic inspiration of anorexia and boob jobs, I'm going to go out on a limb and assume most pageant-viewing parties today consist of either southern families and BBQ or gay men and martinis.)
The following 2 URL's are provided. They are part of the Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man web site, part of John Hopkins University.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Omim/getmap.cgi?l306995
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=306995
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=35663&page=2
According to the above forum, homosexuality used to be listed among psychological disorders, until gay activists lobbied to have it removed. Some pedophiles have taken the same stance, but nobody's buying it, thank God.
One of the psychologists responsible for actively having homosexuality removed from the list of psychological disorders only three decades ago was a man named Robert Spitzer. He's changed his views. In Oct 2003, he published a study that shows that "homosexuality" can be cured through "reparative therapy."
Growing up I had five good girl friends. Everyone of them came from broken homes. Their parents were either divorced, separated, having affairs or only staying together for the child and fighting all the time. How is that keeping marriage sacred? I was lucky enough to grow up in a household built around love and respect. Yes, my parents are a man and a woman, but so were every one of my girlfriends whose family lives were in ruins. How is a child's life better with two parents who are at each others throats? How is a child's life better being shifted from house to house on weekends and for two weeks during the summer? Compared to a child who grows up in a household where the parents love and respect each other? Who cares that they are of the same or different sex? Isn't what is important is the child is loved?
If your argument against gay marriage is the destruction of family... I think there are a lot worse things the idea of "family" is facing right now then gay or lesbian couples.
I generally liked your article but it's unfortunate that you ended it with such a boldfaced stereotype of pageant-goers. After calling out Lynn Vincent you ended up sounding just like her, generalizing pageants and the people who watch them. If you didn't see the problem with doing then don't ever expect Lynn Vincent to...
This is not about the word "marriage". What happened in Washington with Referendum 71 is proof positive of that.
not that it truly matters, because i see no authority for anything in the bible-- it;s not my book!
Hermaneutics is the ifne art of getting the bible to say what you want it to say.
Neither ignorance nor stupidity are defenses here. There are at least a dozen translations of the bible in english alone. I believe the King James version was translated from 12th century German translations.
By the way, King james lived 400 years ago or so. his english is NOT modern english.
Is Ms. Rust referring to the Bible here? If she is, then she must not be aware that the Old Testament has only been translated once (from the ancient Hebrew to modern English) or twice (ancient Hebrew to ancient Greek to modern English). The New Testament only once, from the ancient Greek to the modern English. Or does she mean that the original moral laws have been changed from the original?
"Believe what you want to within your religious institution of living, but don't tell me where my tax dollars can and can't go based on that."
Is Ms. Rust stating that people who follow a religion, e.g. Christians, should not be allowed to vote, or does she mean that they should not be allowed to have a voice in public affairs?
"But saying that you aren't afraid of your friends doesn't mean you're not homophobic. Saying you don't agree that gay people have the right to be married does."
Does Ms. Rust mean that if you disagree with some issue, then you have a phobia concerning that issue or a phobia of the people involved? So if I say disagree with abusing drugs, I am a "drugophobe?"
you are totally entitled to your feelings about marriage equality. justify. go for it.
this is just SOOO not going to be an issue a generation from now. enjoy it while it lasts.
Not sure what book you are referring to, given that you are talking about a book only translated once or twice...
Look up the nicean council, they are the folks who met a few hundred years after the crucifixion to collect the scattered tales of Jesus and decide which ones should be written down. Then ask a Jew (preferrably a Rabbi) whether your old testiment is identical to the Torah.
As for religion and state, you can vote, but saying "The bible/Torah/Quran/Principea Discordia says that behavior X is wrong, so the state should make it illegal," is what the separation of church and state is all about! If you have a valid non-religios reason that gays should not marry, out with it. But any argument that falls back on the bible is in direct opposition to the Constitution that we base our laws on.
Of course, you will probably bring up that gay marriage will weaken straight marriage, and maybe it will, a lot of Republican Homophobes would divorce their wives and marry other men, since the temptation of marriage would be too much for them to stand...
So naturally, she's a conservative icon.
They have the same, narrow perspective as Homer Simpson who in the brilliant episode, "Homer's Phobia" resented that gay people weren't so obvious and said:
"I like my beer cold, my TV loud, and my homosexuals FLAMING!"
I love the flamers amongst us and of course think they deserve a place at the table as well, but these cynical, faux-friendly homophobic types like Palin, Prejean, and Vincent like to use the more flamboyant among us to demonstrate that sure, they're human beings...but a different kind. And with that difference comes their justification to treat them like dirt.
And to quote Stephen Colbert: "I don't have a problem with gay people. In fact some of my best friends are going to hell."