Archive for the gay marriage Category

The next Great Awakening

Posted in culture, gay marriage, marriage, politics, religion on August 5, 2010 by Jonathan

My gripe with the Reagan Revolution of the ‘80s was that it focused on politics and not the culture, putting all its energy toward the former while ignoring the latter. In truth, politics – the politicians, policies, judicial rulings, etc. – is a result of what is happening in the culture. For the last several decades, there has been a strong and tenacious movement within the media and the classroom to eradicate the pillars of Western civilization, pillars which are incompatible with the left-wing worship of equality. That movement had one of its victories yesterday. As much of the public expresses outrage over the presence of a mosque near Ground Zero, a far greater wound to the soul of the country was carried out in a California courtroom as one judge, in regard to the biggest issue of any society – the definition of marriage – overturned the will of around 7,000,000 voters, all of whom in the brave new world of progressives are now considered bigots. Had conservatives and traditionalists kept their eye on cultural institutions – on movies, television, books, music, schools, universities, churches(!) – the idea of transforming marriage, and therefore gender relations, wouldn’t have the momentum it has now, and we wouldn’t be on the road to a pre-Leviticus world. Now we are. Let the next Great Awakening come.

Friday links

Posted in books, culture, gay marriage, news, politics, television on June 12, 2009 by Jonathan

The Wall Street Journal looks back at how author Ignazio Silone, founder of the Italian Communist Party, later became a staunch anti-communist. [HT: Michael Wade]

Will the new Miss California have to prepare for pitchforks and torches coming her way?

In the What the hell? files, the National Organization of Women(!) is going after David Letterman(!) for his joke about Sarah Palin’s daughter(!).

Speaking of Big Dave, Palin says she won’t be going on his show:

“The Palins have no intention of providing a ratings boost for David Letterman by appearing on his show,” Palin spokeswoman Meghan Stapleton said Thursday. “Plus, it would be wise to keep Willow away from David Letterman.” [HT: Big Hollywood.]

My advice to Palin? Don’t go on Letterman’s show. Go on Conan’s.

Hollywood diplomacy

Posted in culture, gay marriage, news on May 11, 2009 by Jonathan

Actress Cybill Shephard joins the pantheon of great American thinkers:

“I’m a Christian Pagan Buddhist Goddess worshiper, but I’m also a feminist. I think the ultimate glass ceiling is God, in another words, if we think God is a man, then we make man a God, and I studied and learned that there is a whole other history of the worshiping of the great mother,” she explained. “I really think that probably God is a woman, that helped me to break through that celestial glass ceiling.”

The Great Mother worshipper said this while criticizing Mormons and Catholics for the passing of Prop. 8, claiming that keeping marriage man-woman is akin to racial segregation. Meanwhile, at the same bash she attended a couple other actresses pulled out the old “they just don’t understand” line against those who voted for the proposition. 

Substantive arguments are one thing; hostile and condescending attitudes towards your opponents are another. And right now, those with the loudest voices in the gay marriage crowd are offering the latter.

The Shame Game

Posted in entertainment, gay marriage, news on April 20, 2009 by Jonathan

A Miss USA contestant made the fatal error of speaking her mind:

When asked by judge Perez Hilton, an openly gay gossip blogger, whether she believed in gay marriage, Miss California, Carrie Prejean, said “We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that’s how I was raised.”

Of course, many in attendance did take offense, which was the whole point of the question: to make those who believe in traditional marriage feel uncomfortable. However Ms. Prejean answered the question would accomplish this. If she answered that she supported gay marriage, she was one of the enlightened while the opponents of it were still living in the dark ages. But if she answered differently — which she did — not only would she instantly feel the backlash, but those watching who agreed with her would feel it as well, if vicariously. 

So goes the left’s strategy: If you can’t win them, shame them.

Polygamists on the march in Canada

Posted in gay marriage on April 9, 2009 by Jonathan

Few know the state of the culture of the Western world like Mark Steyn. His writing manages to be perceptive and funny even when covering sober topics, and he comes across in interviews as an erudite Jon Stewart.*

His latest column has him arguing that those who claimed gay marriage would never lead to polygamy are being proven wrong:

Five years ago, proponents of same-sex marriage went into full you-cannot-be-serious eye-rolling mode when naysayers warned that polygamy would be next. As I wrote in that Western Standard piece:

“Gay marriage, they assure us, is the merest amendment to traditional marriage, and once we’ve done that we’ll pull up the drawbridge.”

Claire L’Heureux-Dubé, the former Supreme Court justice, remains confident the drawbridge is firmly up. “Marriage is a union of two people, period,” she said in Quebec the other day. But it used to be a union of one man and one woman, period. And, if that period got kicked down the page to accommodate a comma and a subordinate clause, why shouldn’t it get kicked again? If the sex of the participants is no longer relevant, why should the number be?

There’s arguably no greater cultural issue than the definition of marriage, and right now there’s no thornier issue to broach, especially if you’re in support of the traditional man-woman definition, and especially if you’re also the lighting guy on the staff of The Ellen Degeneres Show. So if you have reservations about the government’s sanction of two men getting married, it’s less of a hassle to keep those reservations to yourself than to feel the sting of being called a homophobe and compared to the racists of the ’50s. (Or, as Andrew Klavan says, being told to “shut up.”)

But, even if one supports gay marriage, it’s important to recognize that its legalization will bring real changes in the culture, polygamy being just one of them, and probably the least of them. The traditionalist opinion may be odious and intolerant to the gay marriage crowd, but the latter will win more credibility if they answer the objections of those like Steyn honestly and without hostility.

*but funny

Heaping scorn on those who deserve it

Posted in gay marriage on April 3, 2009 by Jonathan

There’s something to consider in light of the Iowa court decision declaring that banning gay marriage is unconstitutional.

If believing that marriage is ideally between a man and a woman makes one a bigot and worthy of our eternal scorn and condemnation, then the following people were bigots:

Martin Luther King, Jr., John F. Kennedy, Abraham Lincoln, Gandhi, Winston Churchill, Mother Teresa, George Washington, Albert Einstein, Frederick Douglas, Galileo, Michelangelo, Rembrandt, Charles Darwin, Shakespeare, Aristotle, Ben Franklin, W.E.B. DuBois, Plato, Cesar Chavez, Susan B. Anthony, Franklin Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, Jesus Christ.

Just saying.