Friday, June 17, 2011

David Tyree - the black Carrie Prejean, and other Friday midday news briefs

Remember the beauty queen Carrie Prejean and how the National Organization for Marriage was going to use the controversy between her and Perez Hilton to push its cause? That was a good idea in theory, but Prejean's inability to articulate the issue (and later discoveries about her penchant for posing nude) sank it hard

Well with David Tyree, NOM's newest poster child, there is no need for nude pictures or any other past peccadilloes. I think the above interview with CNN Kyra Phillips proves that he may have bit off a little more than he can chew.

Way to go, NOM. I love how you pick spokespeople.

And in other news

Kevin Jennings To Critics: "You Completely Failed" - You lose, Kevin Jennings critics.

NY marriage bill hits snags on religion questions - Stupid stall tactics which will be rectified.

UN Group Backs Gay Rights For The 1st Time Ever
- Good for the UN!

Bookmark and Share

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Interesting how he goes off on the "slippery slope" argument for polygamy.

If my recollection of the Old Testament is correct, then polygamous marriages WERE the good and accepted norm back then.

So that shows a few things.

1. God didn't seem to have any problem with it back then.

2. Marriage HAS been redefined from the previous "good and accepted" polygamous model to monogamous. Does that mean monogamous marriage is unnatural?

3. If marriage HAS been redefined since then, and it was ok, then what MAKES it ok? Where was God's stamp of approval? What future changes to marriage would make it ok?

4. I do recall seeing stuff on early homosexual Christian marriages, though they might have slightly different names. At the time, the church was ok with that. God didn't smite them. Was that ok or not?

Marriage is only a legal and symbolic RECOGNITION of the union of love between people ANYWAY. It's a human institution to acknowledge a real breathing relationship. Likewise divorce is merely the legal and symbolic recognition that the union of love has already disolved. And our legal framework is artificial and fluid depending on culture and society, and has nothing to do with spiritual stuff.

Therefore I can't help but think that if God is really interested in all of this, he has more of an interest in what's going on in the heart rather than what we say about recognizing that reality according to our own systems. And if God is love, then he will only see himself and goodness within hearts bound by love.