But there comes the time when we just have to speak the truth in love, and the truth I've got to speak today is that marriage is too important a cornerstone of this great nation to leave it to the straight people to abuse any longer.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Case in point is this one just in from ABC News:
A newlywed Massachusetts couple spent their wedding night in separate jail cells after police said the bride tried to run over an old flame of the groom.
Police say 22-year-old Hyannis resident Marissa Ann Putignano-Keene tried Monday to run over the other woman and the woman's son in a parking lot. The intended victim later told police that she had previously been in an intimate relationship with the groom. The bride was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon. Her husband, 37-year-old Timothy Keene, was riding in the car with her and was charged with disorderly conduct.
You can read the rest here ... although I'm not sure what more there is to say ... other than it looks like it's time to call in some reinforcements in the "defense of marriage" department.
Between Tiger Woods, John Edwards, Mark Sanford, David Letterman and examples like this "not so happily ever after" story I think the clock has run out on heterosexual privilege when it comes to marriage and it's time to call in some homos to the rescue!
Take it away, District of Columbia!
.
Between Tiger Woods, John Edwards, Mark Sanford, David Letterman and examples like this "not so happily ever after" story I think the clock has run out on heterosexual privilege when it comes to marriage and it's time to call in some homos to the rescue!
Take it away, District of Columbia!
.
6 comments:
Penalty flag, Susan. Straight stupidity can't necessarily be fixed by GLBTQA reason (unless you're planning to fly to the East coast and deliver a well-deserved whack in the head to this particular bride & groom). I have lots of questions about this "happy" couple, starting with 1) what were their respective families of origin like and 2) was there any marriage counseling.
You've been a cleric long enough to probably have some great (as in truly wonderful) and great (as in amazingly dysfunctional) stories about weddings. Regardless of the sexual orientation of those seeking to marry.
Lets please call stupid what it is - "Stupid" - without attributing an excessive share of virtue or vice to any particular subset of the human race.
Sorry, Mark. I'm stickin' with it on this one. A few years ago I'd have used Britney's 55 hour Las Vegas marriage. Or Liz Taylor or Mickey Rooney's multiple marriages.
The point is the UTTER foolishness of the idea that marriage is under "attack" because gay people want to love each other til death do them part.
lol let's not generalize now. People are individuals. Just as the people who argue against homosexual union shouldn't use those crazy bathhouses to signify all gays, so too we really shouldn't use the jealous psychos to stand for all straights. I think gays should have equal rights... marriage, insurance, pensions... and all the headaches that go with it. Death before dishonor ("Divorce him? Nah, but I might kill him.")
It's not fair to judge all straight couples by these aberations. Although my wife probably doesn't have warm fuzzy feelings about the women I dated before we were married, she definitely would not try to run them over. And believe it or not there are dysfunctional same-sex relationships. About two years ago I sat is an Indio Courtroom waiting for my client's case to be called. The calendar ahead of mine was the restraining order calendar. Same-sex couples made up about a third of the cases. Some of the violence and injuries presented to the Court by way of pictures were horrific - particularly man vs. man cases - more so than the straight couples. The point is, you cannot, and should not, stereotype anyone.
The logic of "The actions of some members of Group A are damaging something, so it is invalid to argue that Group B's actions will damage it as well" escapes me.
The institution of marriage is being damaged from a general concept that it is an institution belonging to people that can make it whatever they want it to mean instead of viewing it as an institution ordained by God that is subject to what He wills.
The fact that heterosexuals are in far too many cases buying into this and are doing the kinds of things you highlight does not by any particular stretch of logic mean that the Church should bless either that or the concept that homosexuals can be included in it.
We should be exhorting the heterosexuals who are abusing it to stop doing so. We should not use their actions as an excuse for inviting further abuse.
Ron ... I'll see you and raise you the damage being done to the Constitution by those who think they have the right to inflict their theology into our democracy.
(Exhibit A: [marriage is] an institution ordained by God that is subject to what He wills.)
You get to believe that. You don't get to dictate that belief to those reponsible for equally protecting the equal protection of American citizen who happen to be gay.
Post a Comment