arguments

...now browsing by tag

 
 

Hiding Bigotry Behind Specious Arguments

Sunday, August 31st, 2014

You know what I admire about bigots? And I’m not referring to the merely prejudiced, mutter-out-of-the-corner-of-their-mouth bigots, but the real wackos, the warped, scary, neo-Nazi, open Klansman, proudly sign-their-name haters.

You know what’s kinda great about them?

At least they’re candid. No pussyfooting around for them. They state their hate boldly, cast their slurs loudly and only then try to back it up with whatever false theories they believe support their irrational hatreds.

For everyone else, it’s the other way around. They timidly roll out their specious argument first, as if that were the important part, the crucial logic that made up their impartial minds, and led to their subsequent negative opinion, an unfortunate by-product.

Authored By Neil Steinberg – See the Full Story at the Chicago Sun Times

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

Grasping at Straws to Fight Marriage Equality

Thursday, February 6th, 2014

Gay WeddingLeave it to the folks in Utah to come up with one of the lamest, but most highly predictable, responses to the issue of gay marriage.

A recent federal court decision struck down that state’s ban on same-sex nuptials because the prohibition was, of course, unconstitutional. Somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,400 gay couples got married before the U.S. Supreme Court put a hold on the decision, pending further arguments before the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

Attorneys for the state, which is dominated by the Mormon church, filed their arguments in a bid to uphold good, old-fashioned man-woman marriage, and they’re doing it for the children.

That’s right. It’s all about protecting the kids of Utah.

See the Full Story at the Observer-Reporter

Click here for gay travel resources in Utah.

Why There Should Be No Stay of Marriage Equality in Utah

Friday, January 3rd, 2014

Utah MapGays and lesbians have been free to marry in Utah — yes, Utah — for two weeks. Judge Richard Shelby, who was appointed by President Obama at the behest of Utah’s arch-conservative Republican senators, cited the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Windsor when he said that the Constitution’s guarantee of equal “dignity” for gays and lesbians requires the state to recognize their love. Since the decision was handed down, hundreds of gay couples, including Natalie Dicou, left, and her partner, Nicole Christensen, have gotten married.

Now, the State — the home of the Mormon Church, Prop 8’s principal benefactor — wants those marriages to stop. After failing to ask for a stay during the course of the case before Judge Shelby, after messing up its request after the fact, and after ultimately losing before the Tenth Circuit, the State has one last hope to delay equality: Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

There are many problems with the State’s request. Let’s set aside for the moment the fact that the conservative leaders of Utah’s state government want to deny the very existence of our love. Set aside the injustice of anti-gay marriage discrimination, in general, and focus on the stay itself.

Authored By Ari Ezra Waldman – See the Full Story at Towleroad.com

Find more articles and gay wedding resources in Utah.

Arguments Against Marriage Equality Keep Getting Dumber

Wednesday, August 21st, 2013

Gay Wedding RingsThe arguments against gay marriage have always been dumb. They’re getting dumber.

The hardest job in Washington has got to be antigay activist. It’s hard not to feel sorry for these people who wake up every morning, look in the mirror, and think “How can I work to deny gay people rights today?” It’s hard not to feel bad for these folks. (OK, it’s not that hard, actually.)

The arguments against marriage equality have never been good. But now that the opponents have lost so many battles, now that it’s clear the country has irreversibly turned in favor of same-sex marriage, the old arguments — you know, breakdown of the family, being gay’s a choice, sexual anarchy, blah blah blah – have to be discarded. Luckily, even dumber arguments — if that’s possible — are waiting to take their place.

Authored By Matt Barnum – See the Full Story at The Advocate

Find more articles and gay wedding resources.

USA: Dan Savage Says Straights Should Be Offended By Anti Marriage Equality Arguments

Monday, April 1st, 2013

Dan SavageGay columnist and “It Gets Better” creator Dan Savage thinks heterosexuals should be offended by some of the arguments being made against marriage equality. The Advocate reports:

“Literally, what they are arguing in the DOMA case right now before the Supreme Court is that we need to reserve marriage rights for straight people because only straight people get pregnant by accident,” Savage said. “I don’t understand why straight people aren’t offended when people who claim to speak for traditional marriage… go to court and say, ‘we straight people are so irresponsible and heartless that if we don’t have the inducements of a wedding ceremony and a delicious cake, we will abandon our children by the side of the road.’ This is the last argument that they have – that straight people suck.”

I hadn’t thought of it that way – but he’s right – they’re basically saying that straight people can’t be trusted, because old men will have sex with young people and people will get pregnant out of wedlock if marriage isn’t reserved for straights to keep them in line. It is kind-of offensive, when you think about it.

Unfortunately, straight people aren’t used to thinking about themselves as a group, as the LGBT community is, so I’m sure it’s easy to say “oh, they don’t mean me, they mean those other straight people over there.”

Australia: Senate Releases Arguments For/Against Marriage Equality

Monday, March 19th, 2012

Australia Marriage EqualityAltering the definition of marriage to allow same-sex couples to wed would be the equivalent of defining sheep stations as lighthouses, a Senate committee has been told.

The first 70 of what are expected to be thousands of submissions to an inquiry into a Greens bill to legalise gay marriage have been publicly released.

Newcastle University senior law lecturer Neil Foster told the inquiry that any attempt by Parliament to change the nature of marriage by allowing weddings between same-sex partners would be unconstitutional. “The constitutional power over lighthouses, for example, cannot be used to regulate sheep stations by defining a sheep station as a lighthouse,” Mr Foster said in his submission.

Full Story from The Canberra Times

Click here for gay wedding resources in Australia.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

NC: Which Argument Will Win the Day in Marriage Equality Fight?

Friday, September 23rd, 2011

North Carolina Gay Marriage FightDueling slippery slope arguments vied for the attention of North Carolina voters during a recent debate about the state’s proposed constitutional ban on same-sex marriage.

“All persons are created equal but that doesn’t imply, for example, that three people can claim to be married,” said Republican House Majority Leader Paul Stam on Wednesday, according to video from the debate by ThinkProgress. “Rep. Glazier never answered that question: how he would he tell three people they couldn’t be married once he told any two people they could?”

Stam further argued that “different things can be treated differently if the things or people are in a very different relationship.” But Democratic Minority Whip Rick Glazier offered a correction, and then his own slippery slope.

Full Story from The Advocate

Click here for gay wedding resources in North Carolina.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook. We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

Stupendous Compendium of Anti Gay Marriage Arguments (and why they’re wrong)

Sunday, February 13th, 2011

From Rick, the guy behind the Ambiguity Report blog and the very funny tweets @SquigglyRick:

There has been a lot of talk about this gay marriage business bringing about the end of the world. Something about The Gays unhinging their collective maws and swallowing villages whole. It’s a compelling argument if you’ve ever been to Mardi Gras and mistaken it for the world’s most fabulous army invading the streets. We’re here, we’re queer and we’re annexing your collection of interior design manuals. However, contrary to popular belief, The Gays aren’t trying to take over the streets. Urban gentrification is about as militant as we get, believe me.

So to help those who feel like they need to keep peddling the marriage-go-round of mistruths, I have compiled this Stupendous Compendium of Anti Gay Marriage Arguments (and why they’re wrong).
You’re welcome.

It’s about religion.

No, it isn’t. Going to church is about religion. Loving thy neighbour is about religion. Marriage is a secular contract presided over by Government. Like taxes. Atheists get married. Religious people get married. Some churches won’t marry inter-racial couples, or previously divorced couples. They’re welcome to. That’s their right. But that doesn’t preclude these people from marriage altogether. Because it’s secular.

Full Story from The Gay Marriage Blog

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.

New Book Series Why vs. Why Tackles Gay Marriage

Friday, May 7th, 2010

Why vs. Why: Gay MarriageSometimes it’s hard to get both sides of an argument, but a new publication combines reasons for and against gay marriage.

“Why vs Why” is a series of short books presenting both sides of topical debates, and for Gay Marriage it commissioned the Tasmanian Gay and Lesbian Rights Group’s Rodney Croome and Family Council of Victoria secretary Bill Muehlenberg to provide arguments pro and con same-sex marriage.

Gay Marriage gives the right of rebuttal to both contestants, and although some of Muehlenberg’s arguments are bizarre – for example, there’s no such thing as equality in law because five year olds can’t marry, nor can fathers and daughters! – the book is a worthy contribution to this ongoing debate.

[End of Article]

Full Story from Blaze

Click here for gay marriage resources.

To subscribe to this blog, use the rss feed on the right, or use the form at right to join our email list. You can also email us at info@purpleunions.com. Or find us on Facebook – just search for Gay Marriage Watch (you’ll see our b/w wedding pic overlooking the Ferry Building and Bay Bridge in SF). We’re also tweeting daily at http://www.twitter.com/gaymarriagewatc.