My main issues with this article can be self explained by the following statements pulled directly from the article itself. There were so many more things I wanted to respond to, but these were my initial reactions:
“ Sandusky is accused of molesting numerous young boys during and after his tenure at Penn State. However, try placing the label “homosexual” on his activities and the backlash will be swift and unequivocal.“
- There are far more pedophiles who are heterosexual in their pedophilic expression, yet we don’t label their point of perversion in the heterosexual nature of their crime, but rather in the pedophilic nature of it. Pedophilia is pedophilia, regardless of the hetero/homo aspect of the expression.
“or those who once were practicing homosexuals but have since come out of the lifestyle”
- Woah! there’s a big difference between a homosexual “lifestyle” and a gay orientation. First of all, what is a homosexual lifestyle? I wake up every morning and gay brush my teeth before I gay eat breakfast and gay pray after I gay read my bible and then gay go to work?! I also gay pursue gay celibacy before gay marriage feeling called to the same standard of purity that all of my not-gay Christian brothers and sisters are called to. I’m not gay because of what I do, I’m simply gay in that I’m attracted exclusively to members of the same sex. I could enter into a mixed orientation marriage and my participation in heterosexual sex wouldn’t make me not-gay.
” …disconnect between same-sex “marriage” and anti-miscegenation laws … Miscegenation literally means “the interbreeding of people considered to be of different racial types.” Ironically, the fact that homosexuals cannot “interbreed” shines a spotlight on the problem inherent in their logic.“
- This is hardly about the ability to breed. I’m pretty sure anti-miscegenation laws of the past would’ve forbidden two barren individuals of different races from being married and having sexual relations as well.
“The very definition of marriage eliminates the possibility of including same-sex couples. The word marriage has a long and well-recorded history; it means “the union of a man and a woman.” “
- do your history research. Marriage has been redefined again and again throughout history. At one point in time, women were essentially property to be exchanged for other valuable items … only recently, as in within the past century, have we ever had the understanding of marriage that we have today
“People who are already married, 12-year-olds, and people who are too closely related are just a few categories of people routinely and/or categorically denied the right to marry.”
- and what does this have to do with two consenting adults of the same sex desiring the right to marriage and equal treatment under the law? We’re discussing two fundamentally different things.
“One thing that seems to escape most people in this debate is the fact that homosexuals have never been denied the right to marry. ”
- Foul! This completely disregards the fact that not all people have straight orientations and callously imposes a heterosexual requirement for all people desiring equal rights. Flip your world and imagine if you could only achieve equal rights and societal recognition through marriage with people of the same sex as yourself. That is essentially what you’re demanding of people who are gay to do in order to have the same rights and recognition.
“what’s to stop the “bisexual” from fighting for the ability to marry a man and a woman simultaneously since his “orientation” is, by definition, directed toward both sexes?”
- This is laughable and demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of what it is to be bisexual. For a bisexual person to marry both a man and a woman simultaneously, they would enter into a situation much like polygamy. Bisexual people are only unique in that they can be attracted to either sex and so pursue marriage with either a man or woman. Just because a straight man is attracted to more than one woman doesn’t give him the right to marry multiple women simultaneously.