Monday, December 29, 2008

I Will Not Submit

Bill Kristol tells me what I already know:

The assault on Prop 8 supporters has been extraordinary in its mean-spiritedness and extremism--but the left knows what it's doing. The purpose has been to intimidate people with an opposing point of view from defending their position. To be against same-sex marriage, even against the judicial imposition of same-sex marriage, is to be a bigot. [...] Making that charge is at the heart of the agenda of the gay lobby. They don't want to debate same-sex marriage. They want to demonize its opponents.

I guess I can count it a privilege that I've already been demonized. That's okay; I can handle it, and it's not changing my stance one bit.


Joe of St. Thérèse said...

Yeps, and even worse being demonized by your fellow "Catholics"

Kimmah said...

the vast majority of incidents in those scandals involved teenage boys. Still illegal, still wrong, and still a blemish, but hardly what you call "raping little boys."

I teach 13-year-olds and I have a15-year-old and I can't for the life of me understand how the fact that the word 'teen' being part of their age makes them not 'little boys'. You seem to suggest that because of their age they are somehow less of a victim. Or perhaps because they're older, do you think they can handle it better? If anything, the emotional toll on a boy who was raped as a teen would seem to be greater than that of a boy who was raped when he was 4. Either way, it's far more detrimental to society than two consenting adult men choosing to get married.

Just curious, what did you think of Britney Spears' 36 hour marriage? Or how marriages between the Anna Nicole Smiths and J. Howard Marshalls of the world? Or the marriages between older US men and mail order brides from Russia or the Ukraine? How are THOSE marriages acceptable, but one between two women such as bravie and michelle is seen as a sin that cannot be allowed.

Cygnus said...

No less of a victim, Kimmah, but hardly "raping little boys." Control the language, control the argument. I stand by my statement.

I oppose ANYthing that undermines the traditional family unit: same-sex "marriage," abortion, unmarried sex, sham marriages like those you cite, no-fault divorce, pornography, abusive marriages, etc. Because I so staunchly oppose one of these segments doesn't minimalize my opposition to the rest.

Cygnus said...

Nor, might I add, does the existence of problems in marriages justify the need for same-sex "marriage," as if all homosexual relationships are better than heterosexual ones.

Chip Arndt, call your office.