The National Organization for Marriage constantly tries to pass itself off as an organization created to solely protect the "so-called" special institution of marriage.
The mantra of "Don't mess with marriage" has been heard constantly in its talking points and when its spokespeople - Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher - are interviewed concerning the organization's goals and such.
Gallagher herself has said that she thinks its unfortunate how sometimes people misinterpret the things she says as a condemnation of "gay parenting skills."
Don't believe Brown, Gallagher, or anyone from NOM when they come with that spin. It's not necessarily the things that Brown or Gallagher may say about same-sex families, but how they present the issue and allow their supporters to ruminate over it.
Case in point, a recent post on the group's blog featured a piece on a from the UK Daily Mail over two gay couples fighting over custody of two children.
It's an ugly situation but would NOM have given a damn about it if the couples involved where heterosexual? Of course not.
But here is the tricky part. NOM doesn't make a comment on the situation. The organization merely posted the article verbatim. It merely allowed its responders to comment - making sure of course to moderate comments. Here are just some:
NOM will probably say that posting this UK article is not the same as generalizing about same-sex couples, but the comments of its responders speak for themselves. The organization gave them red meat and like rabid wolves, they chewed on it like it was their last meal.
The mantra of "Don't mess with marriage" has been heard constantly in its talking points and when its spokespeople - Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher - are interviewed concerning the organization's goals and such.
Gallagher herself has said that she thinks its unfortunate how sometimes people misinterpret the things she says as a condemnation of "gay parenting skills."
Don't believe Brown, Gallagher, or anyone from NOM when they come with that spin. It's not necessarily the things that Brown or Gallagher may say about same-sex families, but how they present the issue and allow their supporters to ruminate over it.
Case in point, a recent post on the group's blog featured a piece on a from the UK Daily Mail over two gay couples fighting over custody of two children.
It's an ugly situation but would NOM have given a damn about it if the couples involved where heterosexual? Of course not.
But here is the tricky part. NOM doesn't make a comment on the situation. The organization merely posted the article verbatim. It merely allowed its responders to comment - making sure of course to moderate comments. Here are just some:
Of course the players in this travesty, the so-called adults, have never given a moment's thought to the best interests of the children. They seem incapable of doing so, being children themselves. They are totally caught up in their own narcissistic desires. The judge is understandably frustrated.Children are not pets.
. . . this begs the question, "What is a human?" It is rational animal whose existence requires the unity of male and female whose sexual powers are ordered toward such a union. When a heterosexual couples adopts a child, it tries to replicate, as close as possible, what has been lost: a mother and a father. Gays simply cannot do this. To pretend that they can do this is to lie to oneself. Mothers and fathers are not interchangeable. What's more, only if there is a natural family--that which by its orderliness produces the children that you want to adopt--can you even mimic it. But as you move further away from a memory of the natural family, and it because more difficult to morally plagiarize from it, you are literally without guidance on what to do. Hence, we have this case in the UK. People playing with counterfeit money for so long they forget how the real thing feels like. And who gets harmed? Those who were supposed to receive a different inheritance.
SOME true marriages harm kids. ALL same-sex "marriages" harm kids.
This shows the evil of homosexuality. Part of the evil is their utter disdain for children.
NOM will probably say that posting this UK article is not the same as generalizing about same-sex couples, but the comments of its responders speak for themselves. The organization gave them red meat and like rabid wolves, they chewed on it like it was their last meal.
I absolutely agree with you, Alvin (obviously!). NOM knew exactly what it was doing. Though, one wonders if some of the harshest commentators might have been from NOM's SWAT TEAM rather than general supporters to some degree? And, why couldn't these two families have operated like any divorced couple that remarries and have an alternating schedule like my folks did? One week here, the next week there!
ReplyDelete