The Daily Background
| Ten reasons why gay marriage is un-American
by Arlen Parsa
This is one of those things that floats around the internets and through email, and it’s not exactly new. Still, I stumbled upon it again recently and thought it was worth sharing anyways. The only one of these I’m not a fan of is the first one, because I don’t think you can compare being born gay to inventing air conditioning.
Ten Reasons Gay Marriage is Un-American
1. Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning.
2. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
3. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
4. Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn’t changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can’t marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
5. Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Britany Spears’ 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
6. Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn’t be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren’t full yet, and the world needs more children.
7. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
8. Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That’s why we have only one religion in America.
9. Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That’s why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
10. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven’t adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
What F***ing bunch of Bull !!!
Very funny - unfortunatley the conservative right - won’t get it.
Not sure why Ron thinks it a bunch of bull?
These reasons still make my laugh and truly give thought to just how stupid your average joe republican is. Well, maybe a few democrats, too. I hope this fundy crap ends soon. I have been unseccussfuly married twice. I want the gays to have just as much misery as I did. Everyone should have a chance to make marriage work, but in my case it did not.
Re #3: Heck, yes! I’d marry my cat in a minute! He’d be a better husband than any man I’ve ever met!
Haha, easy there, Ron.
You are so gay and so funny. Cool sense of humor. If its your real point of view, your nothing but PATHETIC
The examples for #10 can be a bit stronger. The industrial revolution made life vastly different from an agrarian society, as was the invention of the printing press to allow EVERYBODY to learn to read. Who can forget the invention of the wheel when suddenly man can travel farther than what his own body can provide? In recent history, women were empowered to leave the household and hold their own careers.
I think one point Lacey makes deserves a more complete representation. In fact, Mr. Gutenberg was motivated to create the printing press for one very specific purpose. That was to print the Bible so each person could have and read it for theirselves.
I know it’s meant to be sarcastic, but some are taking them seriously, so here are some other reactions.
1. The argument is ‘un-natural’. As in drinking poisoned Kool-Aid. In other words self-destructive, at the least.
2. It seems present observations are bearing this out.
3. This too has been threatened and may be legally pursued.
4. Just because some people have warped ideas of what marriage is? Some have and do think it has something to do with enslaving your wife, but it was never defined by God as such.
5. Yeah, there are plenty of bad examples. The definition should not authorize or enable them.
6. The infertile usually break their proverbial necks to get pregnant. They joined with every intent to do so. The aged likely already have. The idea is the purpose and expectations. Though I’ll allow that a couple which has an incapacity should have the right even if they know it is impossible to procreate.
7. Some straight parents raise gay children. Mostly straight single parents though. More gay parents will raise more gay children.
8. Religions change and new ones are created all the time. Don’t follow mans lists of how to get to God. Follow God’s desire to make you righteous. We can’t do it on our own.
9. Many matters of offense to our children are scientifically documented due to single parenthood. Health problems, liklihood of criminal behavior, psychological issues, difficulties in school, and more are greatly increased seemingly due to this one problem.
10. Many features of that adaptation could be highly undesirable to most people. re:Sweden & Norway.
I feel sorry for you David
I’ve seen this list before, and I always have the same reaction. First I smile because it’s funny. Then, I start to think of what the goal here is, and it strikes me that by spreading this list people think they’re supporting gay marriage by making it’s opponents look ludicrous. I realize that mocking peoples opinions is funny, but these comparisons are primarily non-sequiter, and in the end they boil down to, from a religious right perspective, trying to justify gay marriage by saying “other injustices happen, so this one is okay.” Sadly, saying gay marriage is okay because marriage no longer has sanctity anyway (vis a vis Britney Spears), is an easily reversed statement.
Humor good, poorly considered activist humor, not so good.
David,
1. Drinking poisoned kool-aid is self-destructive because of physiological responses to the poison (duh). My relationship with my partner is not self-destructive, nor is it unnatural (even though it is not going to result in spontaneous procreation.)
2. Would you like to try supporting this with evidence? Who do you know that is now gay because of gay marriage? In the past, no one might have ever KNOWN that I was gay, but I still was gay. There seems like there are more gay people now because they are starting to be able to say it without as much fear.
3. A dog does NOT have the legal ability to enter a contract and never will. This is an absurd argument. Crazy people (and people trying to make your “point”) may say anything, but man-animal marriage is simply not possible.
4. “For man did not come from woman, but woman from man; neither was man created for woman, but woman for man. For this reason, and because of the angels, the woman ought to have a sign of authority on her head;” 1 Corinthians 11:9, 10. “…women should remain silent in churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission…†1 Corinthians 14:34 “Wives submit to your husbands, as is fitting to the Lord.†Colossians 3:18
And your incorrectness notwithstanding, we aren’t trying to change how YOU think God defined marriage, but rather how various GOVERNMENTS define it, which has indeed included miscegenation laws, absolute permanence, and the destruction of a woman’s individual rights. The argument that “marriage has always been like it is today” is specious. It has changed before.
5. You are assuming that a gay marriage would necessarily be a bad example. Do you have any support for this? I know many good examples of marriage between same-sex couples, even without the recognition of the government. No, I’m sure you’re engaging in circular logic here: “Gay marriages are bad marriages because they aren’t REAL marriage because only man-woman marriages are REAL marriages, therefore we shouldn’t consider gay marriages REAL marriages, only man-woman marriages.”
6. Oh, you’ll allow? Thanks. Well, I know that my partner and I will need a fertile male donor to allow us to procreate… we’re infertile, with a lack-of-sperm factor :o) We have, though, the same expectations and purpose as a hetero couple who knows their incapacity and plans to work around it.
7. “Some straight parents raise gay children. Mostly straight single parents though. More gay parents will raise more gay children.” This is simply false, absurdly false. Read a study or two that is put out by scientists with integrity. Hell, just go TALK to some gay people - my partner and I were both raised by our biological, married parents, who raised us well and with the expectation that we would be straight - and yet, they will be standing up with us on Saturday when we marry each other, because they have realized what you can’t - that our decision to create a family is just as worthy of celebration as our straight siblings’ were.
8. So what are you saying? It sounds like “Of course there are many religions. But the one I believe in is RIGHT, and yours is wrong.” That’s unamerican, sir.
9. “Many matters of offense to our children are scientifically documented due to single parenthood.” Well, phew! Good thing none are scientifically documented due to gay parenthood! Sounds like the best thing for children of gay people would be to let their parents get married, lest they suffer from single-parent-disease. You DO have the best interests of children in mind, right?
10. I think you’ve fallen for a common hoax about norwegian marriage rates and their relation to allowing gay marriage, but I can’t be sure since you’re so vague. However, I’d point you to this:
http://www.slate.com/id/2100884/
“In fact, the numbers show that heterosexual marriage looks pretty healthy in Scandinavia, where same-sex couples have had rights the longest. In Denmark, for example, the marriage rate had been declining for a half-century but turned around in the early 1980s. After the 1989 passage of the registered-partner law, the marriage rate continued to climb; Danish heterosexual marriage rates are now the highest they’ve been since the early 1970’s. And the most recent marriage rates in Sweden, Norway, and Iceland are all higher than the rates for the years before the partner laws were passed. Furthermore, in the 1990s, divorce rates in Scandinavia remained basically unchanged.”
“Kurtz concludes that ‘… married parenthood has become a minority phenomenon,’ and—surprise—he blames gay marriage.
But Kurtz’s interpretation of the statistics is incorrect. Parenthood within marriage is still the norm—most cohabitating couples marry after they start having children. In Sweden, for instance, 70 percent of cohabiters wed after their first child is born. Indeed, in Scandinavia the majority of families with children are headed by married parents. In Denmark and Norway, roughly four out of five couples with children were married in 2003.”
In conclusion, Stanley Kurtz is either an idiot or evil. :o)
Karen, I hope you decide to take things into context next time you quote anything.
Did you know that the Bible clearly states that “there is no God”? Really, it does. But the problem with stating that is that its in the middle of a verse. “The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good.” (Psalm 53:1) Oops, context is important.
So onto what you quoted. “women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.” (1 Corinthians 14:34)
This sounds really old fashioned to begin with, even under New Testament standards. Do you know why women were not allowed to speak in church? Because they were uneducated. They would sit in church and try to understand what was being said and would ask a million questions during the church service causing a roar of whispers throughout the service. The law was written so that the uneducated would not ruin the service for everyone else. If you don’t believe that explanation, try reading the NT. Several letters to the early church communities applaud them for uplifting several female church leaders.
For the second part you quote:”Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.” (Colossians 3:18) But if you look to the very next verse you will read “Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.”(Colossians 3:19) And if you look at another letter to the Ephesians you will read something very similar, but better explained in my opinion.
“Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior. Now as the church submits to Christ, so also wives should submit to their husbands in everything
Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless. In this same way, husbands ought to love their wives as their own bodies. He who loves his wife loves himself. After all, no one ever hated his own body, but he feeds and cares for it, just as Christ does the church for we are members of his body. For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. This is a profound mystery but I am talking about Christ and the church. However, each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself, and the wife must respect her husband”. (Ephesians 5:22-33)
Clearly reading the next verse or even doing a little research before trying to whip something out would be wise for you.
I am not a supporter of gay marriage or gay rights. I respect your right to opinion, but I have mine as well. David might be a little too headstrong with his argument, but yours is equally patronizing and arrogant in tone. Be nice, even if others aren’t.
Hi, my sites:4e48be93965b5e505a2b44d67b122861