Commenter chris and myself have objected to gay marriage on grounds that heterosexual marriage is essentially an anti-cuckoldry social rule codified into law, and gay marriage undermines that social rule by importing homosexual norms into heterosexual marriage. (This is inevitable if gay marriage is the legal and cultural equal of heterosexual marriage.) The consequence of gay marriage and its attendant norms will be the end of monogamy and the patriarchal nuclear family, which will destroy the most important lynchpin of civilization.
Coming to the same conclusion, but from a different angle, is Quads, who writes succinctly about the ways in which gay marriage upends the traditional order honed by millennia of evolutionary trial and error.
Gays of yesterday used to understand that they were in some way broken. It wasn’t just that they had a sexual dysfunction, but that they were excluded from broader social life. They could never produce a family, they could never be part of the basic unit of society. They knew it and embraced it. This is no longer the case.
Society has changed. Its basic unit is no longer the family, where men and women each play a part, where knowledge is passed from one generation to the next. (That was too bigoted.) Now it’s the individual, a citizen who pays taxes and consumes goods and services, who is society’s basic unit. This is all it means to be normal — this is what the social revolutions of our time asserted. Everyone is identical — men, women, blacks, whites, asians — and everyone plays the same social role. In this atomized context, where marriage and sex are private behaviors, then gays really are Just Like Us.
Today’s gays see themselves as normal. Any bigotry against them is just arbitrary and irrational, because they can do anything you can do. They work and pay taxes and consume goods, Just Like Us. And to an extent they are normal, they’ve marinated their whole lives in a culture of atomized individuals. Marriage isn’t a ritual, something with social significance, but just an achievement, like buying a car or getting a diploma. So any combination of private reasons — tax benefits or a fantasy of being “married” some day — is justification enough. Gays are Just Like Us, their money is as good as yours. Gays are Just Like Us, and they’ll believe this even as they get fisted by a stranger in the airport bathroom.
Just Like Us is a pithy phrase that encapsulates the conflict Quads mentioned between socially significant ritual and individually rewarding achievement. In a society increasingly breaking down into being defined by its least common constituent parts (ie consumerist cogs), the normalization of and rationalizations for gay marriage will necessarily have a corrosive effect on heterosexual marriage, subverting the social oversight dimension of marriage and substituting it with a shrunken hyper-individualistic quality which reduces marriage to a private consumer purchase with no implication for the wider society.
Gay marriage is an empty sacrament of accumulation — a rite of crassness — without a broader and deeper connection to family or society, past or future, and without the gravity of acting as an occasion and a commitment enforcing a collective rule which exists for the benefit of a larger social purpose than the kitschy gratification of deracinated and atomized consumerist impulse.
Mark my words, we will pay dearly for the folly of passively acceding to the gay marriage fuggernaut.
The double meaning of that phrase can also suggest or rather plead for normies to just like gays as they are.
“Just like us. What’s the big deal?”
A subversive phrase to then later force you to bake the cake.
LikeLiked by 3 people
like a lot of lefty things, the arguments can jump from same love, just like us to the barrel of a gun and mass graves pretty quickly. James Hodgekins would approve.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gays are nothing like the normal heterosexual. Even the prolific among us – I’m at 125 lifetime, others may be over 200 or more – are a PIKER compared to the AVERAGE gay who hit 250 a year before AIDS, down to like 120/yr afterwards. Per. Year.
Not even on the same planet. Ex gf worked hotels, had a job during a gay gathering, watched men buttfucking in front of the windows; leather chaps, swings, all kinds of degeneracy. I try to tell good anecdotes to anyone who says stupid Just Like Us bs. Average life expectancy below 50…etc.
Gays run Hwood and they don’t let negative press go. (((they))) gays are pathology squared.
LikeLike
Righty things (mind you I’m on CH so I’m pretty righty myself) also have led to mass graves (or forced chemical treatments) for us gays. Please bear this in mind. We’re your sons, brothers, friends, etc. Gay men exist in every race, culture, socioeconomic group. If you make us your enemy then even the most enlightened will be temped to flock to the lefty side.
LikeLike
trav777 the specimen of gay men you are referring to is like the top of the top of straight men that get hundreds of girls. The vast majority of gay men do not have sex with anywhere near that number a year. 20-30 would be a much more realistic estimate.
LikeLike
Like 30 to 40 different dicks in your ass per year is something to consider as normal or relatively chaste?
Geez, Louise, no wonder you queers have such physical and psychological maladies.
(((shakin’ mah haid)))
LikeLike
Like hell you are.
Tempted? You cocksuckers are already deep lefty as a group, and push for every- and anything that upends the normal order of things.
Get the fuck away from us, you. 😡
LikeLike
This is similar to my pet peeve of listening to globohomo pretend to care about Christmas (or football) and then spend 2 months pushing some sort of odd ode to snow and “Seeing the family”. Sure. that’s the true meaning of Christmas, don’t you know? Seeing the family and snow. It’s a holiday only relevant to upper northern hemisphere. I tell you what, even the original pagan origins of Yule made more sense. And of course, globohomo spends the rest of the year trying to eradicate Christianity but be sure to use the snow and the seeing the family as a reason to spend the fuck out of yourself.
so, sure, enjoy adopting babies who hate you and pretending you’re all in on the same love. This will end well.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“so, sure, enjoy adopting babies who hate you and pretending you’re all in on the same love. This will end well.”
Lol. Well said. To be sure, leftoids love nothing more than their pet negroes- of any age.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Christmas is extremely popular in Latin America and carries a heavily religious, Catholic connotation there.
LikeLike
Whose faggot is this?
LikeLike
There is zero reason for gay marriage.
Leftists HATE marriage and have been working to destroy it my entire life.
Now all of a sudden in the 00’s they love marriage and want it extended to gays? LOLZ what bull shit. This was done by a (((certain group of people))) simply to mock us and our beliefs. This ENTIRE gay marriage issue is just them trolling us.
LikeLiked by 2 people
nah. it’s over $. Tax breaks and MFJ status. Gays outearn hets, higher net worths. Function also as a mafia. Add them to ((())) and you have geometric growth of clout. Their lobbying power is what did it.
LikeLike
I believe conservative types neglected the battles so long, cucked so much, that when anal marriage came knocking people had no words to defend themseleves.
LikeLike
Like all Satanic offerings, “gay marriage” is a perverted, twisted, stillborn simulacrum of something sacred, a mockery whose purpose has nothing whatsoever to do with the actual institution’s necessary impetus – to provide a stable, nurturing environment for offspring. At its best it can only offer the salve of delusion to its participants – “look, we’re just like normal people!” and serve to bolster the narcissism and triviality so endemic in the gay community. “Everybody looks at us!” “Hey, let’s have an expensive party!” At its worst it serves as a weaponized toxin to corrode and sicken the foundations of civilization.
LikeLiked by 3 people
[…] Just Like Us: The Gay Marriage Lie […]
LikeLike
Watch Joe Rogan interview someone who tries to come across as intellectual and enlightened but basically is one who packages up lies in a pretty bow. I don’t know who this Russell guy is and don’t want to. Likely a pawn of Soros.
This Russel guy believes the Foulcault post-modernists of 1960s France brought on so much freedom by allowing anyone to determine anything, because feelz. Sadly, reality has hammered this lie like a rental truck plowing through a Nice street on a beautiful summer’s eve.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I could only watch 5 minutes of this BS.
LikeLike
Joe Rogan. Presents himself as a deep thinker but he is just another one of those guys that Sinclair Lewis so pithily pinned.
And the other guy has terminal gayface.
LikeLike
Agree on Rogan.
Phony AF.
LikeLike
It’s easy to see why we will pay dearly.
We are expending societal resources on people who WILL NOT reproduce. Think about the implications of that carefully. We have just told a bunch of young impressionable people its ok to have sex with the same sex and not procreate. We have told a bunch of young impressionable people that MARRIAGE is not really that important and “anyone” can do it.
And those young people will not get married and thus will have less opportunity to procreate.
Without procreation we don’t have new workers, solders or mechanics. We will be importing these… let me see the last time a large political entity imported solders from barbarian areas what happened? Mmmm fall of Rome anyone? anyone?
LikeLiked by 3 people
The ultimate black pill might just be that marriage was destroyed in the early 19th century when women were granted the inalienable right to own property in marriage. They instantly started arguing about property and divorcing over property, and no “libertarian” compromise has ever stuck. Real marriage recognizable to Anglo-Saxon Christian civilization isn’t coming back without a nuclear apocalypse.
By the way, the pedos have always been in charge of adoptions, even before queers won marriage rights. It’s why orphanages rather than perverted caricatures of family were used to house bastards in the old days, when people knew better. People knew adverse selection so instinctively they understood why monarchism was God’s government and democracy was Satan’s.
Well, Satan has been winning for centuries. There’s not much else to say. I feel like the West is divinely damned because the wrong side won the English civil war in the 17th century, a couple lifetimes before Robespierre and Napoleon and the Jacobins and so on. Even this might be optimistic, given that Protestantism itself looks increasingly like a series of delayed fuse meme bombs waiting to explode after enough centuries of established heresy. Henry VIII and so on.
Islam and Judaism and even atheism all just don’t seem to matter much compared to how much damage the Eternal Puritan can inflict on his own race. His heterophobia, guilt culture, and individual salvation through works (for some “greater good”) all exploit the best aspects of whites for the worst outcomes. We need more shameless shame culture Don Juan Catholicism in the bloodline!
LikeLike
In England at least, women actually had the right to property for many centuries and did not lose their rights to it at m*rriage. It did not become the property of the husband. When they m*rried – it is my understanding – it was only their chattels (tools, maybe the stock, I am not sure, etc) that went into the ownership of the husband.
At the same time, the husb@nd took on every obligation of the w1fe, responsibility for all of her debts, including her criminal behavior.
The story we have been fed on these issues has not been entirely evenhanded (duh).
LikeLike
Anyone else have their totally awesome comments get eaten?
LikeLiked by 1 person
plus read Scalia
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/576/14-556/dissent5.html
LikeLike
The substance of today’s decree is not of immense personal importance to me. The law can recognize as marriage whatever sexual attachments and living arrangements it wishes, and can accord them favorable civil consequences, from tax treatment to rights of inheritance. Those civil consequences—and the public approval that conferring the name of marriage evidences—can perhaps have adverse social effects, but no more adverse than the effects of many other controversial laws. So it is not of special importance to me what the law says about marriage. It is of overwhelming importance, however, who it is that rules me. Today’s decree says that my Ruler, and the Ruler of 320 million Americans coast-to-coast, is a majority of the nine lawyers on the Supreme Court. The opinion in these cases is the furthest extension in fact—and the furthest extension one can even imagine—of the Court’s claimed power to create “liberties” that the Constitution and its Amendments neglect to mention. This practice of constitutional revision by an unelected committee of nine, always accompanied (as it is today) by extravagant praise of liberty, robs the People of the most important liberty they asserted in the Declaration of Independence and won in the Revolution of 1776: the freedom to govern themselves.
LikeLike
But what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch. The five Justices who compose today’s majority are entirely comfortable concluding that every State violated the Constitution for all of the 135 years between the Fourteenth Amendment’s ratification and Massachusetts’ permitting of same-sex marriages in 2003.[20] They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds—minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis, William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly—could not. They are certain that the People ratified the Fourteenth Amendment to bestow on them the power to remove questions from the democratic process when that is called for by their “reasoned judgment.” These Justices know that limiting marriage to one man and one woman is contrary to reason; they know that an institution as old as government itself, and accepted by every nation in history until 15 years ago,[21] cannot possibly be supported by anything other than ignorance or bigotry. And they are willing to say that any citizen who does not agree with that, who adheres to what was, until 15 years ago, the unanimous judgment of all generations and all societies, stands against the Constitution.
LikeLike
Hubris is sometimes defined as o’erweening pride; and pride, we know, goeth before a fall. The Judiciary is the “least dangerous” of the federal branches because it has “neither Force nor Will, but merely judgment; and must ultimately depend upon the aid of the executive arm” and the States, “even for the efficacy of its judgments.”[26] With each decision of ours that takes from the People a question properly left to them—with each decision that is unabashedly based not on law, but on the “reasoned judgment” of a bare majority of this Court—we move one step closer to being reminded of our impotence.
Justice Scalia was found dead with a pillow over his head 3 months after he published this. Hmmmm.
LikeLike
Before you build something, you have to demolish what sits there previously.
Creative Destruction is what builders call it. This disorder is brought purposely to atomise people. Left, right, whatever party, it matters not. The Pravda samizdat inculcates them all. The cuckservatives, the Marxists, and even the Libertarians. People are just “economic units”.
The Merchants of Menace destroy the biological structure to unravel their victims. They push invaders onto you to crush your resistance to their depredations. Its (((them))) or YOU.
Geography is a zero sum game. Lebensraum is more than a “real estate” investment. Its what every creature NEEDS to SURVIVE.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Geography is a zero sum game. Lebensraum is more than a “real estate” investment. Its what every creature NEEDS to SURVIVE.”
Agreed- as is society itself. We do not exist in a vacuum. If you promote (celebrate) one segment of society you will, at best, de-emphasize another. At worst you will demonize it (eg. Anti-White Hate.)
We all know this to be the case on a common sense level. The problem occurs in transmitting that message as opposed to the ubiquitous fairy tales farted out by the libtards of one love, happiness, togetherness, equality.
I propose something similarly aspirational instead of rational, promoted through parallel media and institutions.
LikeLike
Trump will “sign any immigration bill that congress sends him”.
He is “willing to take the heat” from his supporters.
Lesson learned.
NEVER trust a buffoonish “alpha” with proven bad character and Jewish relatives.
I don’t want to hear any bullshit about 4d chess. This presidency has been going downhill since election night, and it just hit rock bottom.
Trump is doing the exact opposite of the America First platform he promised:
Immigration – Will sign any amnesty passed by the Democrats and McCain Republicans.
Foreign policy – Expensive economic and proxy war against Russia for the benefit of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
He has consistently reserved his most venomous attacks for prominent America First supporters such as Sessions and Bannon.
LikeLike
problem is that he could not get anything done without engaging the swamp. He got rid of everyone who was anti-swamp because they wanted war, despite his swearing he’d wage it, he’s a pussy who needs to have his ego stroked CONSTANTLY.
Maybe he decided to play a longer game, make the wall part of the DACA thing, but he will have to negotiate. He will not get anything maga done without compromise with swamp people.
However, the pro-jew stuff has mostly been talk. Has been no war, we actually did gtfo syria, albeit I think we are setting up a kurdistan east of the euphrates
LikeLike
Mark YOUR words?
Mark these:
Romans 1
25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done.
Jude 1
7 In a similar way, Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding towns gave themselves up to sexual immorality and perversion. They serve as an example of those who suffer the punishment of eternal fire.
etc., etc., etc.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I read once that one of the objectives of the writers of “Sex and the City” was to layer h0mosexual praxis onto heterosexual females, thereby normalizing all things g@y.
Sounds pretty sinister to me.
LikeLike
Sounds like (((BAU))) to me.
LikeLike
is this guy alpha or what ?
a White Male banging the most wanted hottie, Emily Ratajkowski.
Too bad he couldn’t take care of Julie Ordon as well.
LikeLike
The Mormon church was WAY ahead of the curve on this one, issuing their Family Proclamation back in September of 1995. I remember when it came out that it was full of a bunch of statements that I just said “well, duh” about. No more. The world has gone certifiably nuts over the past 22 years.
A few highlights-
“We, the First Presidency and the Council of the Twelve Apostles of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.”
…..
“Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.”
…..
“By divine design, fathers are to preside over their families in love and righteousness and are responsible to provide the necessities of life and protection for their families. Mothers are primarily responsible for the nurture of their children”
…..
“We call upon responsible citizens and officers of government everywhere to promote those measures designed to maintain and strengthen the family as the fundamental unit of society.”
https://www.lds.org/topics/family-proclamation?lang=eng&old=true
LikeLike
Urgh. Stuck in mod. Not like I comment here often.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nothing will be solved without a return to hire and brimstone Christianity.
“The West” Or “Europa” were held together under the Roman Empire’s Christianity
We are Christendom
Christendom is what holds all the white cousins and 2nd and 3rd and 4th cousins together
It literally is our Big Tent
LikeLiked by 1 person
“heterosexual marriage is essentially an anti-cuckoldry social rule codified into law, and gay marriage undermines that social rule by importing homosexual norms into heterosexual marriage”
“the consequence of gay marriage and its attendant norms will be the end of monogamy and the patriarchal nuclear family”
Heterosexual marriage
iswas essentially the ownership of one human by another.The marriage contract was once very similar to a land title. Imagine: two men shake hands, one signs a document, a small ceremony is performed, and the transfer of asset is finalized with a “ground-breaking” ritual.
Homosexual marriage caused nothing. It is the inevitable consequence of the revision of the marriage contract into a “partnership” of two “free and equal” persons bound by nothing but mutual self-interest. Ayn Rand would be ecstatic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Call me old fashioned, but I like my depravity shameful and done on the downlow behind closed doors. With splashes of class that you find in an Andrew Blake movie from the early ‘90’s or from that frog fag Marc Dorcel. You know 3 hawt thin slim girls for every guy, who keep their motors running while you…anyway what was I saying? Oh yeah depravity. But when that depravity makes its way out in the open where impressionable little kids are (under 12, hell even under 20) that’s when I get angry. Homosexuals are a minority group, typically they are about 2% of the population. So how is it in a system, where majority rules that we can allow the minority of minorities over rule the majority? And when I hear the argument that they’re your doctors (they’re not) and your hairdressers et cetera. I call bullshit. Unlike the blacks who are 10% to 13% of the population in the U.S. The gay lobby have managed to convince everyone that they’re right and we’re wrong. WTF?????!!!!!!! In my blue pill days I thought that we should give them a chance. I was even friends with one (in the mistaken belief that he was hooked into a group of single hot and willing girls, sadly he was not!) These fuckers are depraved, on scale that…still leaves me…@&@&$! The things that these guys would say, and the stomach churning stories omfg..smh. There was a reason why Church leaders would pound the pulpit against them, and the police would turn a blind eye when they were beaten up at night. Nature has a way of keeping certain populations in check. Spiders eat fly’s. The mongoose eats snakes. Hyenas and Lions you get the picture. But this current trend will not end well. Because there is no social shame mechanism to keep them in check. We need to protect our little ones from this nonsense like Putin does in Russia. Out of the public eye and out of public discourse. Minorities should by definition have limited amounts of power. The end game of the gay lobbies moral hazard won’t be good. It will not end well for the majority who have been too tolerant for too long. It’s like an Asian proverb that I was told (and i’m sure i’m fuking it up when I say it). A friend will get away with more than your enemy. The gay lobby and the feminist lobby have nestled themselves on to the bosom of the majority, and are getting away with far more than our enemies ever could.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Thank G0d somebody realizes that gays are 2% and not 10-40% (typical millennial guesstimate) of the population.
LikeLiked by 2 people
they are already normalizing pedophilia right in front of your eyes.
I have a stupid fking cousin who was always on FB waving the rainbow flag and don’t get in the way of love n’ shit. I warned anyone who’d listen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
LikeLike
Damn, wtf is going on that this is tolerated? 😡
LikeLiked by 1 person
“And when I hear the argument that they’re your doctors (they’re not) and your hairdressers et cetera. I call bullshit.”
You don’t think there are gay doctors out there?
Also, what if your son ends up being gay? Or your grandchild? Or your brother? We still don’t know exactly what causes it so there’s no way to prevent it.
LikeLike
Damn mod.
LikeLike
Fuck you, mod.
LikeLike
If you want to see how totally just like you they really are, search “standard fuck party” on YT (have a vomit bag handy).
LikeLike
A couple of gender discrimination lawsuits will remedy all this hatred real quick
LikeLike
Soylet(s)? Priceless enough to need to be propagated. merci beaucoup, Monsieur Heartiste, no irony express nor implied.
So, do soylets soil, as in promiscuous shitting?
LikeLike
As a gay man, I had never really come across a succint, believable articulation of the opposition towards gay marriage on the grounds that it would “de-legitimize” or harm heterosexual marriage. Every time I saw preachers, Republicans, internet bloggers, etc talking about it, it was all very effusive and nondescript. But this CH paragraph:
“the normalization of and rationalizations for gay marriage will necessarily have a corrosive effect on heterosexual marriage, subverting the social oversight dimension of marriage and substituting it with a shrunken hyper-individualistic quality which reduces marriage to a private consumer purchase with no implication for the wider society.”
…is the first time I’ve seen a convicing argument.
I have to admit that I myself am on the fence about it. I believe in family as an essential unit in society, and also believe in the importance of extended family, and at the same time in the individual being able to decide the course of his or her life. That includes organizing your assets and entering into partnerships with other people, call it marriage, civil union, whatever. While there is no doubt that some gay men (lesbians probably less so) treat ‘gay marriage’ as a fashion accessory, I also personally know of many gay couples that have treated their marriages with far more reverence and old-fashioned romance than many straight people I know (they say men are the true romantics, after all). Some of them are raising adopted children (extraordinarily well, I must add) that would have otherwise ended up drug addict delinquents once ejected out of the foster system. They are very much functional families, and many gay men do grow up really wanting to be in a forever-love situation with a life partner and with kids. And no, CH readers, I am not trying to propaganda you. Yes there are gay men who live the meth-orgy lifestyle, but at this point it’s socially reinforced, which brings me to my next point. I would support a gay marriage that was built on the notion of old fashioned romance and the family unit, as I think it can also act as a regulatory mechanism for the rampant gay male libido that gave us the spread of AIDS in the 70s. If society embraces gay men, but only if they are monogamous, it could work. It’s in our nature, contrary to what some may think. It’s either that or a return to silencing and oppression (I don’t use that word lightly, mind you). And I have a modicum of self-respect and a healthy survival instinct, so I chose the former.
LikeLike
Fucking mod
LikeLike
Why would gay people want to wed? The involvement of the State in their personal relationships is the bane of many men’s existence.
LikeLike
You had a great thing going. Society was/is accepting of you and your lifestyle while at the same time you did not have the large social and family pressures to get m a rried that heterosexual couples face. Why would you want to fuck that up?
LikeLike
There is a conflation in this post between the “celebration” of gay marriage and the “right” for fags to put a ring on it. The media celebrates homo shit all the time and it’s gotten way the fuck outta hand. It’s why democrats are shrinking in numbers. Their megaphone has been handed over to Jewish media lords, so that we may hear the abject cries and lamentations of the outcasts, weirdos, minorities, the weak, and the fucking tranny mental patients; instead of the hard working blue collar white folk that used to be proud of that party.
Personally, I don’t have a problem with homos. I had a lot of good/polite gay wing men hook me up with their hot friends when I lived in KC. They all knew, however, that I was not gay, nor would I ever be gay. Most of them just reminded me of girls with dicks, which is what they basically are, and I never felt threatened by them and I don’t give a shit if they marry each other. No fucking skin off my nose if two dudes wana form a legal contract with themselves and their tax collecting government, which is what marriage in America technically is. The Constitution is the rule book, not the Jewish/Christian B.I.B.L.E. That’s not the blueprint for our government, nor me.
If churches don’t want to perform the ceremony I don’t see why the queers or rug munchers would even wana get married there in the first place. But churches these days are businesses, boys. Not ‘houses of worship’. Gag me with rose petals. These pastors that wear thousand dollar suits are fucking hucksters, and they are running ‘offering plate businesses’ tax free, while they fleece their ignorant flocks with imaginary and lurid images of hellfire to get that necessary/not forced, 10% tithe.
With regard to my original point about the conflation of homos rights and the celebration of their culture, maybe re-read the 14th amendment to the Constitution, and more specifically, section one, the equal protection clause, written by John Bingham in 1864. It affords equal protection to all Americans under the law, as they say. (Not to be confused with the societal poison of today known as equalism.)
Letting fags get married isn’t that big of a deal, dudes. Who the fuck cares. It doesn’t ‘tear at the fabric’ of American society. Fuck that clíche is ghey. An AMERICAN dude has the right to marry another AMERICAN dude based on the equal protection clause. (And not real impressed with the slavery context argument.) Bingham’s language is fluid and simple.
The church and their flocks and their puppet politicians are the only ones that get real riled up about homos tying the knot. Yea I know, religious leaders started marriage long ago and it should be between a man and a woman cuz it has always been, blah, blah, I got that. But the fucking churches and their huckster pastors don’t make the fucking rules in this country. The badass mother fuckers that wrote the Constitution did. And they didn’t put the unconstitutional clause “under God” in our pledge either. That curious and subjective (think Islam in the future possibly) clause was added by Eisenhower in ’54.
Remember that liberty word plastered throughout our Declaration of Independence that you hear limp dick politicians throw down all the time? That’s not just a word to me. To me it means you can do what you want unless you start infringing on someone else’s liberty.
Marriage is a legal contract between two consenting adults as far as the government is concerned. Fuck the church and their pastors that pretend to speak for God, and thump them Bibles and whine. What a bunch of horse shit.
If two dudes wana get married who the fuck cares? They are two Americans, they have that right legally based on an equal guarantee, simply because two straight people do. I’ve never heard a non-religious argument to refute this that is not somehow intertwined with ‘social norms’. There’s a real objective term that hasn’t changed over time … social norms.
I don’t feel sorry for homos or think they’ve earned their due or wana hear about their gay shit. Two dudes kissing makes my gorge rise, but most of these milktoasts wana get married so they can plan a gay little wedding. Big deal.
HxTHO8Z
Re-read that 1st amendment. Very first line: Congress shall make no law respecting the establishment of religion. It’s the religious, scared of hell, cowards all tipped over about this gay marriage shit. Who but the religious cucks care? The mewling flock?
The world didn’t come to an end when “legal” anal sex was ruled ‘ok’ by the supreme court. It was that important to the founders that they made it the first fucking line of our Constitution; so that unhinged religious zealots couldn’t turn our democratic republic into a goddamn theocracy, based upon their interpretation of a guy in the sky and one old book.
If you wana be ruled by religious nutbags then move to the middle East and muck it up with fuckin sheiks, ayatollahs, and sand niggers. See how long you care about gay marriage when they stone the girl for fuckin ya outta wedlock, or lash your ass for kissing her in public.
I get what CH is saying about homos getting WAY too much air time. I agree. I don’t wana see two dudes kissing and I don’t wana see em prancing around in tutus either. But I fail to see how two fags wearing rings and filing joint tax returns has a corrosive effect on hetero marriage. Do we wana brainwash kids like libs do? Or let them look at how American dudes are becoming more beta and the chics more alpha. They’ll adapt and figure shit out and all will be well after that.
I’ve never heard of a straight couple breaking up over this issue. People break up because someone cheats, or the dude starts being too nice, or the sex and blowies dry up like a sea sponge in the Sahara . What’s killing hetero marriage isn’t homo marriage, it’s feminism and social media (cheater’s fuckin heaven). Sad.
And CH, you’re a damn fine writer, but that second to last paragraph was fluffier than cotton candy, bro. Didn’t make a lick of sense to me, anyways. Had nothing to do with the vocab. And I mean that in a chummy way, if I may say so respectfully. I admire your abilities as a writer, and you can do better.
P.S.
But ‘well by your logic a dude can just marry a dog’, right? Spare me. Dogs ain’t American citizens last time I checked. I know I’ll get mobbed instantly for this post, I doubt it’ll even get put up. I’ll refrain from arguing back with y’all if it makes the cut.
I think arguing in comments sections online is ghey. I love this blog because of its Intelligent arguments about women, white culture, and politics. And I dont know when quoting lines from the Bible became automatically sound, humanistic and intellectually stimulating, but it reminds me of when Obama used to say something gay and passive was ‘the right thing to do’.
Ol lady is passed out next to me.. I’m debating whether or not to teabag her lazy ass. Peace.
LikeLike
Amigo – Nice post. I pretty much agree with your take on this. I came at the issue from a slightly different angle, and my comment in that regards is in mod since yesterday ….but the main point ….. respect for true-western culture is where it’s at, and as you have pointed out, the American constitution does quite a nice job of outlining what true-western culture is.
LikeLike