Maggie Gallagher notes the continued seething rage behind those who want to tear down marriage equality -- the expectation of equal participation of each gender in each marriage -- for their own self-interests.
Reading her angry e-mails, Monica "wept." She won't care for my sympathy, but nonetheless, she has it. You have to experience it to understand -- it is shocking to discover the waves of hatred now aimed at forcing conformity with the gay marriage party line. Either you are for gay marriage or you are a bad person who should be repressed, humiliated, hurt, marginalized and excluded. "What's next, a piece on how a KKK leader is just 'someone next door' and 'really a nice person'?" as one outraged Post reader put it.
Read it all...
Here's a non-rage response to Prop 8.
ReplyDeletehttp://rescuemarriage.org/
Peter,
ReplyDeleteSo what do you think of the rage mentioned in this article, which is much more nationwide then Prop 8?
Something seems to have happened to my earlier response. I think the rage is unwarranted. Furthermore, it is counterproductive to the cause the letter writers support.
ReplyDeleteI'll agree to both statements Peter.
ReplyDeleteWould you say the rage shows their response to the failure to bring this to a solution that both sides can agree on? Is their rage because they have lost patience with the tolerance that is required to help each side feel they've been listened to?
I can't read minds. I'm certain that the letter writer's wrote angry letters for a multitude of reasons. I'm not sure that I'd extract much from them about the movement as a whole, any more than I'd judge the entire Tea Party movement based on a few outrageous or silly posters held up at the DC march this past Saturday.
ReplyDeleteWell, by comparing to the tea parties, the answer to my question would be "yes". The tea parties are openly about frustrations I mentioned, even if the others are trying to be more repressed in the reasons of their rage.
ReplyDeleteAnother fine piece by Gallagher.
ReplyDeleteA majority of gay "marriage" supporters believe they are simply "opening up" marriage to include homosexuals. They don’t want to except that it is not static. Once you accept the reasoning all supporters of traditional marriage must be marginalized and stigmatized. Our ability to ask for sacrifice and promote intact married childbearing become not noble efforts or even controversial points of view. Rather we become un-American, un-constitutional bigots – social pariahs, who are intolerant of “difference.”
No amount of appeasement can pacify this fundamental ideological rift. As the article points out, even efforts to show the true human face of marriage supporters is deemed collusion with the enemy and dangerously anti-social. A generation after same-sex “marriage” this logic becomes too fierce to resist. Promoting the traditional family will be commensurate with racism.
Put that way, marriage just looks like a collateral damage in a much bigger war. But its damage that both sides rely on for their infrastructure.
ReplyDeleteJust how did we get to the point of this scorched earth tactics in a petty political/social war?