Connect With Us

FacebookTwitterRSSYoutube

The Anti-Gay Response To Today’s Arguments Over Same-Sex Marriage

No to same-sex marriage says Maggie Gallagher

No to same-sex marriage says Maggie Gallagher

Maggie Gallagher appeared on FOX News today, probably expecting a friendly venue. What she got was Megyn Kelly instead. Gallagher, one of the founders of the anti-gay National Organization for Marriage, apparently argued that the Supreme Court should not overturn the ban on same-sex marriage in California, but Kelly apparently was not having any of that.

Kelly compared same-sex marriage to interracial marriage, which was illegal in various parts of the United States up until Loving v. Virginia struck those bans from the face of the United States. Kelly struck back at Gallagher saying “But before I get back to Richard on that, there was a time in this country in which interracial marriage was not lawful. And the Supreme Court had to step in and say, ‘That’s wrong. Under the U.S. Constitution, under the Equal Protection clause, whites can marry blacks and states are not free to tell them otherwise.’ And those that advocate on behalf of this issue, Maggie, they say this is another, sort of, iteration of that.”

Here is the exchange:

Of course, not everyone at FOX is as open minded as Ms Kelly. Todd Starnes, a FOX News contributor, went on American Family Radio where he continued to fear monger trying to say that ending marriage discrimination would result in a functional ban on Christians practicing their religion:

STARNES: You know, it’s as if we’re second-class citizens now because we support the traditional, Biblical definition of marriage, or perhaps we are pro-life, and that means we’re somehow second-class citizens who don’t deserve to be in the public marketplace of ideas.

RIOS (HOST): Absolutely. In fact, it’ll be worse than that. You know there’s going to be punishment. There will be tremendous punishment. If gay marriage is embraced by the country, if the Supreme Court goes south this week in its hearings, we are in for – of course, we’re not going to hear about it until June – but we are in for persecution like we have never seen it.

STARNES: Well, it’s already started.

This is, of course, false, but it has been the biggest argument that the anti-gays have had. Allow for LGBT protections and kiss Christianity goodbye. It is an argument that was made back during desegregation, and ramped up further after desegregation went through. People back during the era prior to desegregation often relied upon religious arguments to attack the idea of racial equality.

Erick Erickson wrote on his RedState blog a fantasy piece in which the US Government terrorizing Christian institutions for opposing marriage equality:

Any Christian who refuses to recognize that man wants to upend God’s order will have to be driven from the national conversation. They will be labeled bigots and ultimately criminals…Once the world decides that real marriage is something other than natural or Godly, those who would point it out must be silenced and, if not, punished. The state must be used to do this. Consequently, the libertarian pipe dream of getting government out of marriage can never ever be possible.

Within a year or two we will see Christian schools attacked for refusing to admit students whose parents are gay. We will see churches suffer the loss of their tax exempt status for refusing to hold gay weddings. We will see private businesses shut down because they refuse to treat as legitimate that which perverts God’s own established plan. In some places this is already happening.

In truth, what Erickson wants is to continue to discriminate against LGBT Americans and feel more powerful for being a bully than he wants to admit. While there have been a few cases of businesses being hurt for being anti-gay, those have not happened because of marriage equality laws, but rather laws which prevent discrimination with regards to public accommodations. In truth, the solution is simple. A baker who doesn’t want to make cakes for same-sex weddings should just stop making cakes for all weddings. A bed and breakfast that doesn’t want to have same-sex wedding receptions should just stop having wedding receptions.

No one is forcing you to do those, and you could probably manage to survive not doing them. Still, despite that, there have been only a handful of cases where the bigots standing behind the register acted like bigots.

Of course, it has been nearly a decade since same-sex marriage went through in Massachusetts. One of the lead Conservative arguments against same-sex marriage comes in the form of how marriage equality will destroy opposite-sex marriages. ThinkProgress asked those anti-gay folks what impact same-sex marriage had on the marriages and the answer should surprise no one.

They couldn’t think of any. For that matter, when asked that, Charles Cooper couldn’t either, and he had to say that to the guys and gals in the robes:

Comments

comments

Share This Post

One Response to The Anti-Gay Response To Today’s Arguments Over Same-Sex Marriage

  1. david traversa

    March 27, 2013 at 11:01 pm

    Not only is their thinking bigoted and criminal ; it’s positively primeval .. and my apologies to primates who , at least , where free from their cultivated hypocrisy .