A openly gay activist fights against gay marriage (attorneys, Minnesota, companies)

[Bettafish]

"Pure sophistry is pitted against reason. Reason is losing."
by Rick aka Mr. Brutally Honest

A gay guy speaks out against... gay marriage:

Same-Sex Marriage: We’re Playing Chess, Not Checkers | Public Discourse


In our sometimes misguided efforts to expand our freedom, selfish adults
have systematically dismantled that which is most precious to children as
they grow and develop. That’s why I am now speaking out against same-sex
marriage.

By the way, I am gay.

A few days ago I testified against pending same-sex marriage legislation
in Minnesota’s Senate Judiciary and House Civil Law Committees.

The atmosphere at these events (I’ve also testified elsewhere) seems
tinged with unreality—almost a carnival-like surrealism. Natural law,
tradition, religion, intellectual curiosity, and free inquiry no longer play
a role in deliberations. Same-sex marriage legislation is defended solely
on grounds of moral relativism and emotions.

Pure sophistry is pitted against reason. Reason is losing.

Here’s the problem: The national discussion of same-sex marriage treats
the issue like a game of checkers, where opponents can quickly gain each
other’s pieces without much forethought about the consequences. This
unreflective view of the discussion has prevented any real debate.

In years past, defenders of marriage found it easy to win the battle on
the checker board. Appeals to religion and tradition won hands down almost
effortlessly. While same-sex marriage advocates argued for a more thoughtful
consideration of the topic, they were mostly just bulldozed over.

The tide has turned. Same-sex marriage proponents now have all the “
kings” on the board, and rule it. One only needs to consider media
headlines from the last few weeks. We are bombarded with approvals of same-
sex marriage. To the casual onlooker, not steeped in this issue, it would
seem that conservatism has embraced same-sex marriage. Each day brings fresh
news of Republican political elites, Fortune 500 companies, NFL members,
and even Dirty Harry himself, Clint Eastwood, throwing their support behind
genderless marriage.

The game we are actually playing is chess, not checkers. This sounds
confusing, because chess and checkers are played on the exact same sixty-
four square game board. Checkers is easy and it’s fast. It’s one of the
first games children learn how to play. Chess is hard, requiring thought
about the intended and unintentional consequences of every single move that
may or may not be made.

In developing their goals for policy and law, politicians often look no
further than the next election cycle. They’re concerned about votes.
Supporting same-sex marriage now looks like a winner for them.

It also looks like a winner for media outlets, concerned about revenues
and readership, and for large corporations, eager to polish their images and
create goodwill. Few of these outlets are interested in playing chess
because a quick win at checkers is more important to them.

The sense of urgency regarding same-sex marriage, now palpably frenetic,
is in itself a sign of our national discussion’s devolution into nothing
more than slogans and emotions.

...

Same-sex marriage will not expand rights and freedoms in our nation. It
will not redefine marriage. It will undefine it.

Do yourself, and society, a huge favor and read the whole thing.

Then pass it on.

It's the right thing to do. You do still believe in right things... do you
not?

[Natnasci]

Total B.S.

[urbanlife78]

"Doug Mainwaring is co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots."

Found the problem with the article, it was right down on the bottom.

[lycos679]

Originally Posted by urbanlife78

"Doug Mainwaring is co-founder of the National Capital Tea Party Patriots."

Found the problem with the article, it was right down on the bottom.

Well, that certainly brings an ironic twist to the teabagger movement.

[TheDragonslayer]

Originally Posted by Natnasci

Total B.S.

I agree, total B S.

[chielgirl]

From an extreme rw site.

I'm straight, and against straight marriage.
Whoop-de-doo.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by lycos679

Well, that certainly brings an ironic twist to the teabagger movement.

What "teabagger' movement?

Have "teabaggers" become political?

[Zelva]

A bit more of the article..... (it's for the children, an important point)

Same-sex marriage will do the same, depriving children of their right to either a mom or a dad. This is not a small deal. Children are being reduced to chattel-like sources of fulfillment. On one side, their family tree consists not of ancestors, but of a small army of anonymous surrogates, donors, and attorneys who pinch-hit for the absent gender in genderless marriages. Gays and lesbians demand that they have a “right” to have children to complete their sense of personal fulfillment, and in so doing, are trumping the right that children have to both a mother and a father—a right that same-sex marriage tramples over.

Same-sex marriage will undefine marriage and unravel it, and in so doing, it will undefine children. It will ultimately lead to undefining humanity. This is neither “progressive” nor “conservative” legislation. It is “regressive” legislation.

Nowhere on any marriage license application in any state are the applicants asked, “Do you love each other?” Yet this is the basis on which same-sex marriage proponents seek to change our laws. Is the state really in the business of celebrating our romantic lives?

The mantra I heard repeatedly in Minnesota was that “marriage is about love, commitment, and responsibility.” But these three things are not the state’s interests in marriage. Marriage, from the state’s perspective, is about kids. Period. That’s the reason the institution exists. We should tremble at and fear the notion of undoing it.

[chielgirl]

^^^
This post is a joke.

People who use the "it's for the children" meme are liars.
What about child abuse, I guess that's for the chiiiiiiiildren, too.

[Oldhag1]

It's a tough call. Much like no-fault divorce, I see very clearly the compelling arguments for SSM. It only seems right that people are entitled to be happy. But if we look at the impact no-fault divorce had on children, if people are being honest, it hasn't been to their benefit. (The exception being children in abusive homes). Same for out-of-wedlock births. It appears, at least to some degree, to be trading in childhood stability and structure, for adult happiness.

I honestly don't know what the answer is. When I look at gay people I care about who have been in long term relationships, I want them to feel complete, and they think marriage would help do that. It's just like when I look at people I care about who are miserable in their relationship, and just want out of it and they feel divorce is the only answer. But I know of adults who still talk about the pain of their parents divorce decades later, so it isn't without cost. I know from teaching for 20+ years, children thrive best in a home where their two biological parents are married and everyone has the same last name. I know people don't want to hear that, it conflicts with their adult wants/needs. Like I said, I don't know the answer, but I do agree with him that we are moving forward with a big social experiment at lightening speed with blinders on to any speed bumps.