This evil Christmas cracker certainly didn’t break that mold.
Godless Mom isn’t scared by much. Things with 8 legs, losing a loved one and this note at the beginning of Denny Burk’s article:
NOTE: Denny Burk will be one of the speakers at the ERLC National Conference: “The Gospel, Homosexuality, and the Future of Marriage.” The conference is designed to equip Christians to apply the gospel on these issues with convictional kindness in their communities, their families and their churches. This event will be held at the iconic Opryland Hotel on October 27-29, 2014. Get a discount on your ticket here.
But why is this scary, Godless Mom?
Well, this guy’s talk will be leading potentially good Christicles to believe he is some kind of an authority on the topic of homosexuality (I wonder if he’s done hands on research?). Of course, they will attend his talk, eager to learn what Jeebanger says and thinks about same sex marriage. They will be led down a dark path of hatred, basted with lies and scrambled with faulty logic. They will come out the other end, foaming over with hatred for something that, quite literally, can be reduced to just love.
This man, of course, thinks he’s doing the lord’s work. The “Lord’s work” of course being a top reason that, even if one day someone proved beyond any doubt the existence of God, I’d no sooner follow the fucktard than I would glue myself to a picnic table in Yosemite and cover myself in blueberry maple syrup. Fuck that shit, the loser’s gonna have to do better for me to respect him in any way.
So, lumberjack slam wants to talk about gay people getting married. He wants to answer, once and for all, what it is about two men marrying that will affect his own perfectly hetero union to his wife. I am eager to learn the answer to this, I am not going to lie, because it’s a question that’s burned a hole in my mind since I was able to comprehend that other people have feelings. I’ve yet to hear a single decent answer to this question, so let’s see if Dennis gets ‘er done.
The assumption in this line of argument is that marriage is a private good with no public consequences.
Correct, Grand Slam, although this is not an assumption. This is factual.
But is this assumption valid? Is it not the case that a redefinition of marriage affects all marriages?
No, flapjacks. It most certainly does not. If the term ‘marriage’ is inclusive of same sex couples, it does not change anyone else’s marriage. If you have chosen to marry the opposite sex, you do not have to change that. You will still be married to the opposite sex, even the very same member of the opposite sex you chose to marry in the first place. That is, until you guys divorce. 50/50 shot… like betting on black.
Certainly a redefinition of marriage to allow gay nuptials will continue to sever the link between marriage and procreation.
Why? Can you provide evidence for this assumption? Here are some Earthly observations:
There are 153 million orphans in the world.
There are increasing numbers of hetero married couples who are opting out of having children.
Hetero couples who cannot have children still marry with no objections from the Church, or losers like you, Denny.
20 million children in the USA alone are being raised in single parent homes.
Gay men and women have found ways to have children of their own, through science, surrogates and just playing for the other team until the piss test goes blue.
The world is vastly overpopulated as is.
I think the link between marriage and procreation was severed the moment the first Christian missionary found himself on African soil, talking about the evils of contraception. It’s been severed by the epidemic of teenagers having babies because their church kept sex ed out of their school. It was severed when Henry the 8th decided to start his own church for the sole purpose of getting divorced. It was severed long ago. Marriage does not equal children and children do not require marriage and plenty of great men and women have come from alternative family units. Men and women like:
What children from non-traditional families look like.
Edgar Allen Poe
W. Somerset Maugham
Johann Sebastian Bach
And millions upon millions more.
Gay marriage proponents frequently argue that gay marriage should be treated as equal with traditional marriage.
Yep, that’s the idea. We also think marriage between two people who are physically incapable of having children should be treated as equal to traditional marriage. Also, we are all for people who have had extramarital affairs choosing to keep their marriage intact in spite of their indiscretions.
Proponents put forth examples of gay couples and their domestic life together to illustrate the point that gay marriage is not different than any other kind of marriage.
It’s not. Unless you’re looking at their junk. Are you looking at their junk, Denny? Do you really think it’s good form to be peeping Moons over Their Hammys without being invited? Ehh, see I think that’s kinda creepy. Just sayin’.
She cites one study that “found that about half of all gay couples have sex with someone other than their partner, with their partner knowing.” Many gay couples are not monogamous but monogamish.
Right. Just like hetero marriages. Polls have suggested near half of all marriages experience infidelity. So, the stats for gay men and women are worse because their partner knows? It’s better to cheat on your spouse and lie about it? Did Jeeby say that? Cause I don’t think Jeeby said that. I don’t think the guy would agree with you on that, really…
In legalizing gay marriage, we are accepting a form of sanctioned marriage that is not by habit monogamous and that is inventing all kinds of new models of how to accommodate lust and desire in long-term relationships.
Let’s just, for a moment, pretend as though only the gays are “monogomish”. For the sake of argument, we’ll buy this lie briefly. Even if it were the case, how does another couple’s lack of monogamy affect your own? Is this like the whole keeping up with the Joneses thing? I mean, is it like you see your gay neighbours sharing other people’s steak and eggs and you feel you must as well? Because, I mean, really you don’t have to. It’s okay to just be you regardless of what other people are doing. It’s okay to remain faithful to your wife, Denny, even though Tristan and Dave across the street occasionally take turns tossing Greg’s salad.
Mark Regnerus argues that monogamy might very well become a casualty of legal gay marriage.
Yes, of course. That’s a perfectly reasonable thing to think. That somehow, your own choice to remain monogamous in your own relationship will be threatened by the actions of other people. I’m gonna lay it out for you Denny, over easy, here’s the shit: If I value monogamy, I will be monogamous. There’s no other person on God’s green Earth (no holy) that has control over me to the extent that I would find myself sunny side up on some other man’s bed. You see, what other people do in their relationships does not come in to play in my own. Odd that, right? The reason why is very simple. I take responsibility for my own actions. The only people for whom marriage will ever be non-monogamous, are those people who allow it to be non-monogamous. If you’re worried about your own, ain’t no thang buffalo chicken wing, all’s ya gotta do is not fuck someone else. Pretty easy. Keep that Slamburger in your trousers and all should be right.
Whereas the vast majority of Americans still consider adultery to be morally wrong, the same cannot be said for those in gay unions.
Twisting the facts does not look good on you Denny. First, the source you provided (here) offers statistics that were gathered after polling Americans. Not hetero Americans, but Americans. Your statistic you’ve offered up, includes the opinions of gay people and hetero people. Second, people’s attitudes towards certain behaviour do not always reflect the reality of the behaviour itself. While it is true that the majority of Americans find it morally wrong to cheat on their spouse, near half do (source). You need to use the statistics that reflect the behaviour, not the attitudes toward it. I know! Making logical arguments is hard, isn’t it Denny. Intellectual honesty make Denny brain hurt. Waitress! More coffee over here!
No, gay men can’t cause straight men to cheat.
That’s right! Someone get this man a slice of pie.
Instead, the legitimacy newly accorded their marital unions spells opportunity for men everywhere to bend the boundaries.
Well then, Denster, it would be men who are the problem wouldn’t it? “Frank’s husband let him do it!”. You know, that’s the logic my son uses when he wants to go out in winter without a coat on. He’s six, by the way.
No-fault divorce laws have given us unilateral divorce-on-demand as the norm.
No one can get divorced without first the desire to do so. In the past, men and women remained in loveless and sometimes toxic marriages because it was taboo to get divorced. The increase in divorce doesn’t mean there has been an increase in relationships going sour. Staying together does not indicate a happy, healthy, monogamous marriage. There are those of us who think it is better to be able to divorce than remain in situations that cause excessive amounts of pain, stress and conflict. Would you not agree?
Here’s the thing, sweet tea. Your marriage is your marriage. If, in the future, “monogomish” marriages become more common, it is only because there is desire to do so already. No one can force anyone else to act in a way that they don’t approve of. My gay marriage supporting parents have remained together and monogamous since 1971, despite having known married gay couples and hetero swingers. How is this possible? That’s simple. Their marriage ain’t none of your business and yours ain’t none o’ theirs.