Friday, April 5, 2013

The Unimportance of 
the Gay Marriage Issue


Before committing Marriage Gay People should take pause
And consider the implications of Community Property Laws.

Lust may achieve satiety
With or without propriety,
So why become a martyr
To receive the imprimatur
Of a dull Bourgeois society
Whose strictures you flee gleefully?

Intimate relationships of each and every kind
Are blithely entered into by mad persons love made blind.
The stress and strain of living close together every day
Demands incessant giving causing tempers soon to fray.

The quest to reach Equality considers not, of course,
The Agony -- and vast Expense -- that comes with a Divorce!
~ FreeThinke- 4/2/13

April 2, 2013

"For the Republicans to regain the Congress they are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee. Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.”

By Alicia Colon - The Irish Examiner, USA

Announcements by potential 2016 candidates, Hillary Clinton and Rob Portman, that they now approve of gay marriage made headlines as predicted. Never once discussed, however, by advocates is how this issue has anything to do with the economic state of the nation today. Legalizing gay marriage will not improve the economy nor is it really that important to the average homosexual. 

Celebrity nuptials and endorsements may garner news coverage stressing it as a civil rights issue but ironically these come from a wealthier than average demographic. The average homosexual has concerns that are much more aligned with the general population –– jobs.

Nor will the laws allowing same-sex marriage impact our national security so why is it even being discussed as a potential hot-button issue for conservatives? Why are we seeing more and more articles on the discord in the GOP between the social conservatives and the moderates? 

For the Republicans to regain the Congress they are going to have to wake up and smell the coffee. Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.

The Republicans have to shout in unison the words that Hillary Rodham Clinton shouted when she was asked about the dead Americans in Benghazi: "What difference does it make?" 

The media didn't hammer her about this callous response but of course they will go after all the Republican candidates tooth and nail so they have to learn right now how to deal with the lapdogs.

When the GOP candidates are asked what their positions are on the hot social issues like same-sex marriage, contraception and abortion, they should fire right back with the questions:

• What does that have to do with saving our country? 

• How are these issues affecting the economy? 

• Why aren't you concerned with that and our national security? 

• Why aren't you more interested in closing the borders to terrorists? 

• Why are you ignoring the continual threat against us by radical Islamists? 

• Why aren't you wondering why the State Department didn't respond to Ambassador Stevens' request for additional security before he was brutally attacked and murdered? 

• How come you're not interested in the Fast and Furious scandal in the Justice Department? Do you think that's just the name of a movie instead of the Justice Department and ATF giving weapons to gun cartels that ended up with hundreds killed and maimed including a U.S. Border agent? 

If you want to know our positions on social issues, read the party's platform. We are all pro-life and for the sanctity of traditional marriage. That's all you need to know. Now for once ask me an intelligent and pertinent question."

Okay, it's unlikely we'll ever have a candidate that can put the media lapdogs in their place. It seems that when we do have someone worthy like that, fate seems to remove them from the running. I still have my Fred Thompson for President button from 2008 and will always remember how he refused to raise his hand as a debate moderator asked the candidates about global warming. Mitt Romney and John McCain were among those who hastily pulled their hands back down after Thompson told the moderator, "I am not doing hand shows today."

When asked by ABC News' Christine Byun why he refused, he answered, "I just decided that I wasn't going to engage in any of this monkey business that they like to engage us on sometimes - making us look like trained monkeys reaching for peanut or something ... 30 seconds is brief enough and when they try to reduce your answer to just a hand raise - I 'aint going to play that game."

What a superb candidate Thompson would have made but alas, he dropped out and the only time I see him now is on television shilling for reverse mortgages. The ability to hush up the mainstream media should be a desirable skill for the next Republican nominee because it is the media that decides what the important issues for debate and these will always favor the Democrat.

... and so the propaganda begins and the GOP falls for it all over again. Last week Time magazine asks, "Why Republicans Are Saying 'I Do' to Gay Marriage." In the article, Zeke Miller writes, "Will the next Republican nominee for President support gay marriage? It is a question that was unthinkable years ago, but amid a rapid shift in public opinion and demographics, it is being seriously considered in GOP circles."

According to Mr. Miller, "Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus supported Portman's decision to change his mind on gay marriage when asked how the party will try to reach out to gays and young voters into the fold, saying it was no different than embracing the so-called Liberty movement championed by Senator Rand Paul. "I think Senator Portman made some pretty big inroads last week," Priebus told reporters. "I think it's about being decent. I think it's about dignity and respect, that nobody deserves to have their dignity diminished, or people don't deserve to be disrespected."

One more reason to get rid of the RNC chairman who ignores the fact that just six months ago, the Republican platform ratified its 2012 platform at the Republican Convention including a reaffirmation of its call for a marriage amendment to the Constitution and a defense of the Boy Scouts of America for banning gay scouts and troop leaders. "We applaud the citizens of the majority of states which have enshrined in their constitutions the traditional concept of marriage, and we support the campaigns under way in several other states to do so," the platform states. "We condemn the hate campaigns, threats of violence, and vandalism by proponents of same-sex marriage against advocates of traditional marriage and call for a federal investigation in to attempts to deny religious believers their civil rights."

The truth that the media is covering up is the very real hatred and violence demonstrated by the advocates of same-sex marriage. My nephew and his longtime partner were shocked at the obscenities and threats sent to me when I defended the Boys Scouts of America. However, I received just as much supportive correspondence from gays who apologized for the militants' inexcusable behavior and insisted that they do not represent the majority of homosexuals. In fact, many tell me that they have no interest in legalizing their relationships. Civil unions address most of their legal concerns in longtime relationships. The gay marriage hype is all about flouting the influence of religious institutions.

Nevertheless, more and more media coverage is being given to groundbreaking announcements from liberal organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics' new policy, citing research showing that the parents' sexual orientation has no effect on a child's development and is now for gay marriage. Hollywood chimed in with, "The Kids are all Right" with heterosexuals Annette Benning and Julianne Moore playing the lesbian Moms.

Let's have a real study that shows that kids raised with love develop fine regardless of the marital status of their nurturers but that having a mother and father in a loving committed marriage is still the optimum choice and one that all children deserve.

But once again the mainstream media is determining that an unimportant issue is all-important and once again, the stupid Republicans are allowing them to do so.

Alicia Colon resides in New York City and can be reached at and at


Epitaph for Two Homosexual Lovers

We kept our counsel quietly, and thrived 
In secret reverie, while platitudes
And mockery from prejudice derived
Surrounded us with violent attitudes.
With faith sincere we never gave up hope,
Pursued our life together with true zeal,
And yet, we wound up swinging from a rope.
Our deaths made pseudo-righteousness seem real.

Love is eternal


  1. The media's harping on the gay marriage issue is helping to inflame anger -- anger on all sides of the issue.

    If one can even call this matter an issue!

  2. Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.

    Not exactly.

    It could be reworded thus:
    Social issues are emotional weapons that the Democrats and Republicans use to obscure the fact that they haven't one good idea on how to save our economy.

    Or it could be accepted that widening people's access to civil rights is a proper function of government that shouldn't meet so much resistance.

    Either way the Republicans come off badly.

  3. Good argument.

    I'm glad I scrolled down. I thought that picture was a perfume ad...

  4. LOL, Silverfiddle. Don't get Ducky riled up here.

    Good nugget of information in the clip on Fred Thompson and pointing out how he wasn't going to act for the media the way they wanted. Maybe he was the best man that didn't win, I guess we'll never know.

  5. Ms. Colon sums it up neatly and accurately in her last paragraph:

    "... once again the mainstream media is determining that an unimportant issue is all-important and once again, the stupid Republicans are allowing them to do so."

    I couldn't agree more.

    This "concern" has NOT arisen from the "grass roots" of the so-called Gay Community. Like every other leftist initiative within living memory those who've spearheaded the movement are interested primarily in getting as many as they can to feel threatened and enraged. Leftists then rush in to "save the country from lapsing into anarchy" by noisily advocating yet-another set of draconian, repressive regulations that cede still more political power to -- the LEFT. (SURPRISE! --- NOT!)

    It's all about generating CRISES in order to EXPLOIT grievances real and imagined.

    The result as always is increased tension, increased division, increased misunderstanding and increased animosity.

    The left constantly picks at scabs, reopens old wounds and pours salt on them in order to keep the political pot at full boil.


    Healing is the very LAST thing they want to see. Their motto should be:


  6. Ducky is partly right in stating the need to include the Republican (Establishment) when affixing blame for the state of the economy.

    DEMMARS (a new acronym heard just yesterday standing for "Democrats Masquerading as Republicans") perfectly describes the GOP (Godawful Out-of-touch Party) as it is today.

  7. Emotional social issues obscuring facts is a result of our human nature.

    Emotional appeals beat facts and logic every time. That is why political campaigns are build upon emotions.

  8. FT,
    Before committing Marriage Gay People should take pause
    And consider the implications of Community Property Laws.

    No kidding!

    As you may be aware, Mr. AOW and I have discovered to our chagrin just how tied together finances for a couple are when devastating illness strikes. Often, both members of the couple go bankrupt.

    Medical bankruptcy is not restricted to old age, either.

    I've been inside nursing homes. Some of the residents are quite young: drug overdoses, car accidents, sports accidents, etc., can land someone in a nursing home for the rest of his life.

    It is my understanding that some civil unions in some states avoid such possibilities for medical bankruptcy. Marriage, however, does not.

  9. Does anybody know what the separation rate is for gay couples? For heterosexual couples (not married, that is)?

    Do those rates mirror divorce rates for heterosexual couples?

    Matters of curiosity. I'm not sure that stats mean all that much. Or maybe they do.

  10. "I thought that picture was a perfume ad..."

    How so, Mr. Kurt?

    If I'd wanted to be funny, I would have put "Are you sure you don't need a man's deodorant? as a caption, but I wasn't trying to be funny.

    The two bits of verse explain my attitude toward the whole thing very well.

  11. With my verse I am trying to inject a note of whimsy and perhaps generate a chuckle or two into what-has-become-yet-another dour, tight-lipped, deadly-serious "Civil Rights Issue" demanding Litigation, Legislation and Social Upheaval for too many probably-well-meaning people who are in no way directly involved with life as it tends to be lived in the so-called Gay Community. [For some reason I am reminded of the old-fashioned "Busybodies" and "Old Maids" in days of yore who were regarded as Experts on Child Rearing by default, because so many became teachers and social workers, et al.]

    At any rate, if you want to find a "moral" in the satirical verse at the to of the page, it might be this:

    "Be careful what you wish for -- you might just get it."

    The following truncation contains serious good advice:

    Before committing marriage gay people should take pause,
    And consider the implications of Community Property Laws. ...
    The quest to reach Equality considers not, of course,
    The Agony -- and Vast Expense -- that comes with a Divorce!

    In other words the Law of Unintended Consequences is always at work. It is more or less a given that "revolutions" usually wind up supplanting one form of rotten leadership and undesirable circumstances with another equally bad -- or worse.

    In the parlance of today we might say: "Meet the new boss -- the same as the old boss."

    Or, as the French so elegantly put it, Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose.

    Meanwhile, I hope everyone had a joyful -- or at least satisfactory -- experience with Holy Week and Easter Sunday however you chose to celebrate -- or ignore -- the occasion? It was very quiet chez moi, but not devoid of reverence. I plead guilty to being a Closet Christian. ;-)

    Best wishes to all,


  12. Why aren't you wondering why the State Department didn't respond to Ambassador Stevens' request for additional security before he was brutally attacked and murdered?
    Because it's a non issue.

    There was an attack on the consulate. In the early stages of the attack there were American deaths and the attack was beaten back. A military response at that point would have solved nothing and quite possibly would have made things worse in Benghazi.

    The CIA reported that the attacks were caused by anger over some dipstick in California who has quite the rap sheet producing a "film" that insulted both Islam and the craft of cinema. In fact the rioters were militants of some sort.

    Couple things pop out at me:

    1. The calls for a military strike. This is typical of the right wing mentality that thinks the U.S. military, despite it's massive failures, being omnipotent.
    No thought required about efficacy or repercussions.

    2. Who the hell knows what the CIA was up to. They fed some phony story for what reason. We don't know and we seem to dumb to ask.

    3. Who did attack and why do we lump every rioter under the rubric of Al-Queda? Who does that benefit.

    Yeah, we should be asking questions but instead we let the ridiculous troika of "Knuckles" McCain, Lindsey Graham and Kelly Ayotte take this in a ridiculous direction intended primarily to let Knuckles vent his anger. The man is not well.

    We should be wondering all right. Wondering why we are asking all the wrong questions and why we let the likes of David "Big Hair" Gregory pimp for the puppet masters

  13. The great irony, AOW, is that homosexuals appear to be striving for legal rights with legal and moral responsibilities that an increasingly large percentage of young heterosexuals largely eschew these days.

    At least FORTY-PERCENT of ALL births occur outside of wedlock these days.

    Mark Steyn wrote a brilliant article a day or two ago skewering the multiple ironies and the base hypocrisy driving this non-issue.

    One thing is for absolute certain sure:

    Heterosexuality per se carries with it no guarantee whatsoever of responsible behavior or moral superiority.

    If homosexuals would like to behave more the way "normal" people USED to, I can't imagine why anyone of a genuinely conservative disposition would object, can you?

  14. How are these issues affecting the economy?

    Well gay marriage boomed up a number of aspects of the Provincetown economy but I don't think that is what you had in mind.

    The Black Bush came out for Social Security cuts as he continues to fellate Pete Peterson.

    The plan is working just fine. Upward income transfer is accelerating and the lower and middle classes sink further into the hole.

    So what the right needs to do is wise up and realize what this false deficit hysteria is doing to them. Won't happen. Instead, they will continue to call Obama a socialist, get behind nonsense about "job creators" (LMAO) and allow issues like gay marriage to be used as a smoke screen by BOTH SIDES as the invisible hand picks your pocket.

    Please note my right wing brethren, the acceptance of gay marriage is virtually inevitable. You know that because Obama cam out in support and being the amoral power broker that he is he would NEVER support a progressive idea unless he felt it was inevitable.

    But he'll help out the economy -- of corporations. Indemnify Monsanto against lawsuit (follow Monsanto and the severe threat of hive collapse if you dare), sign a "free trade" agreement with Europe and others to threaten regulation, build the Keystone pipeline.

    Some socialist, eh? More like a corporate pimp and you ain't catching on to the grift my right wing brethren.

  15. Ducky, thanks for weighing in on some of the secondary questions posed in Ms Colon's article from the Irish paper.

    The persistent leftist canard that Benghazi is a "non-issue" os just that -- a canard. However, have to hand it to the Left. They have mastered the art of delivering The Big Lie while relentlessly scorning the Truth SO WELL that even I begin to doubt my own sanity.

    I think you and I both know, however, that Left and Right don't really have that much to do with present realities anymore.

    We're not fighting Communism OR Capitalism so much anymore. The old left-right paradigm is nearly irrelevant these days. The Economic Enemy is Crony Capitalism -- maybe it always has been these last hundred years.

    I would agree that BOTH sides play games with distorting the Truth to serve an Agenda, but the left is SO far ahead of conservatives in this, apparently necessary, skill that my jaw drops involuntarily and my mouth is left gaping in wonderment.

    "Ignorant armies that clash by night."

    Matthew Arnold's nineteenth-century phrase appears fresher and more disturbingly relevant every day.

    The Homosexual Agenda is a RED HERRING. PERIOD!

  16. Reminds me of the Feminist Agenda... laugh at yourselves, b*tches! You ain't ALL that to be taking yourselves too SERIOUSLY, are ya? ;)

  17. Titan, if you think that sick, stupidly sorry spectacle adequately represents The Homosexual Population in this or any other country, you are sadly mistaken.

    Crap like that is no more a reflection of gays than Madonna, Eminem, Ludakris, Lady Gaga, Honey Boo Boo, and the Porn Industry give a balanced picture of what it is to be white.

    As a species we have a regrettable tendency to judge anything we don't instinctively like by the nastiest, ugliest, stupidest, most extreme example we can find and then say it applies to an entire population group.

    Sorry. I don't buy it.

  18. Blah, blah, blah....

    How dare anyone make fun of the new protected class.


  19. Always keepin' it classy, fj. :(

  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

  21. You have mocked God and celebrated sin with this disgusting thread. I pity you, FreeThinke. Hell is waiting for you, and you have no place else to go, unless you repent of your evil ways, accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior, and beg him to be forgiven. Homosexuality is an abomination. God hates it as much as he hates rape and murder. In Jesus' name I curse you and all your filthy kind for welcoming Satan into your wretched existence. May you never know another moment's peace till your haughty spirit is humbled and your wicked heart is broken and contrite.

    Cecilia Hervas

  22. Is cecilia for real? You proclaim Jesus then curse people? Get a clue.

  23. Excellent article, FT...thanks for posting it.

  24. FT,
    If homosexuals would like to behave more the way "normal" people USED to...

    Those days seem to have vanished.

  25. The IRONY, AOW, is that more and more homosexuals -- of both sexes -- seem to long for the kind of middle-class domestic stability that has long been the norm for most Americans, while the heterosexual population appears more and more to embrace the dissolute, promiscuous, rootless hedonism and bizarre outré behaviors for which homosexuals -- particularly males -- have long been justifiably criticized.

    Put more simply: Heterosexuals today are running away from home in droves, while homosexuals long to return -- something like that.

    I'm sure "Social Scientists" have a name for the phenomenon, but right now the awkward explanation will have to do.

    By the way, what is your understanding of the term "Boston Marriage?"

  26. Always keepin' it classy, fj

    Can't laugh yet?

    The solution to PC'ness is not "silence".

    As I always say to my FRIENDS, "Fuck you, if you can't take a joke!" To my enemies, I simply say, "Fuck you!"

    Wanna learn to live in peace with "the other". Learn to "take" a joke un-seriously.

  27. Thersites,

    Don't you think that ALL human beings deserve "equal protection under the law," or do you think that should apply only to those you happen to like or find worthy?

    The BIG PROBLEM -- as I see it --is that one group or kind, usually led by a megalomaniac or alliance thereof, is always trying to dominate and dictate to those outside the rebellious group.

    This results in a perpetual SHIFTING of the SAME OLD INJUSTICES and OPPRESSIVE TACTICS from the old Vanquished Tyrants to the new Victorious Tyrants.

    Meanwhile, the fundamental problem which is TYRANNY, of course, remains unsolved.

  28. FT,
    From what I know of "Boston Marriage," the term itself did not automatically imply sexual relations between the two school marms -- something along the lines of "don't ask, don't tell."

    Abrupt response, sorry. Have to dash out the door to give a piano lesson.

  29. Marriage, as defined by DOMA, is "equal protection under the law". Brothers and sisters STILL can't marry. Fathers and daughters, mothers and sons.

    Please, this was never about "equal protection". You bought their "blindering" argument.

  30. ps - Some groups NEED to be oppressed. Especially those who's practices spread serious diseases, both physical and moral.

    "Excess is always good" may be a fitting epitaph for our new society of ever more conspicuous consumer consumption.

  31. FJ, did you not note the irony and wry humor implicit in the two bits of verse I shared?

    I find this, however, to be a very serious topic for several reasons.

    1. The chances of a large group of fellow human beings to pursue happiness as they see fit are at stake

    2. Our tendency to act as busybodies in the lives of those we do not understand and whose activities cannot possibly effect our own lives adversely demands and deserves examination and reform.

    3. The apparent need to hate and the wish to cripple, maim and destroy others for no legitimate reason needs to be examined.

    The idea that a few words in Leviticus -- surely one of the most repugnant and pernicious utterances ever to be formed in the churning bowels of ancient Superstition and disseminated by Fear coupled with the atavistic Urge to Invade, Conquer, Rape, Pillage, Enslave and Destroy the "OTHER" -- gives sufficient proof that persecution of this sort in the modern world is as absurd and untenable as it is unjustifiable.

    It's okay not to like something for whatever reason, but it is NOT okay to persecute what you do not like. PERIOD!

  32. or do you think that should apply only to those you happen to like or find worthy?

    Sounds like an argument to completely "do away" with ALL laws, FT. Because unless "someone" thought it worthy, no law would ever be established.

    As Hecuba said in Euripide's classic: "I may be a slave and weak as well, but the gods are strong, and custom too which prevails o'er them, for by custom it is that we believe in them and set up bounds of right and wrong for our lives. Now if this principle, when referred to thee, is to be set at naught, and they are to escape punishment who murder guests or dare to plunder the temples of gods, then is all fairness in things human at an end. "

  33. but it is NOT okay to persecute what you do not like. PERIOD!

    Tell that to the rest of the world. Those who don't push back only get pushed around.

  34. for no legitimate reason

    The spread of AIDS isn't a legitimate reason?

    Then why am I paying for tens of thousands of homo's to get treated at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars per treatment?

    Don't want me to oppose homosexuality? Then stop making ME pay for THEIR stupidity.

  35. I don't think your misogynistic self is funny. Would you share that "humor" with your daughter?

  36. @ Cecilia:

    Yes, homosexuality does stinketh in God's nostrils, but we are discussing politics and civil law, not Christianity.

    I love God and his laws, including condemnation of blasphemy, lying and adultery, but we do not have civil laws against those sins, nor should we.

    "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's"

    I am not gay, but I support the freedom of human beings to live their lives as they see fit. The same constitution that protects the rights of all, including gays, also protects our right to freely practice our faith.

  37. She is my lawyer, after all. When I join the Westboro Baptists, she is going to defend me. ;)

  38. Why, Thersites, from the way you and your partners have posted on this subject I thought you WERE the Westboro Baptist church.

    ------------> Katharine Heartburn

  39. ...One day, perhaps.

    The Westboro Baptist Church is but the first of MANY examples to come of the Right borrowing the Left's legal business model.

    Sue everyone, and shelter the proceeds in a tax-sheltered shell (be it church or non-profit).

    That way, you get more political change for the legal dollar extorted from the "opposite" political party.

  40. The opportunities for extorting contributions from progressive corporate structure is literally "endless". :)



We welcome Conversation
But without Vituperation.
If your aim is Vilification ––
Other forms of Denigration ––
Unfounded Accusation --
Determined Obfuscation ––
Alienation with Self-Justification ––


Gratuitous Displays of Extraneous Knowledge Offered Not To Shed Light Or Enhance the Discussion, But For The Primary Purpose Of Giving An Impression Of Superiority are obnoxiously SELF-AGGRANDIZING, and therefore, Subject to Removal at the Discretion of the Censor-in-Residence.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.