One Nation, One Marriage
Fascinating. Arch anti-gay conservative fundamentalist James Dobson (of so-called "Focus on Family"), in announcing that he would not, could not support a Fred Thompson presidency, had this to say:
"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S.,…?"
[quoted in Eric Gorski, "Dobson Says He Won't Support Thompson", Associated Press, 20 September 2007]
I've gotten rather tired of listening to all the weak arguments by the fiercely anti-gay and the weak but timid kind-of-pro-gay folks who like to avoid making a commitment to marriage equality because it's a subject "best left to the states". I know I've talked before about that tired old "states' rights" gambit, which is always a cover, always a euphemism, always a diversion and has been since it was invented by segregationists as a way to avoid recognizing the human and citizen status of black people in this country.
But who ever thought we'd hear Dobson denounce an appeal to states' rights?
Who ever thought we'd hear me agree with Dobson?
There should be marriage equality in all 50 states, equally, the same. One country, one marriage. And there will be. (Dobson knows this, too, but seems to feel there's some glory to be had in putting it off for just a little while longer.)
One Response
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Thursday, 20 September 2007 at 16.09
Permalink
One doesn't reach the level of a Dobson or a Robertson without knowing when and, where and how to punch buttons that bind followers to a "righteous" leader and get donations rolling in.
Dobson has obviously made a calculation that Thompson can't and won't cut the mustard, not just with the religious right but with Republicans overall. Otherwise, I doubt Dobson would be so quick to burn bridges.
Then again, recalling how John McCain burned bridges with the religious right in 2000, only to seek redemption starting last year, anything's possible.
On the larger matter, you're right in principle. But like I've said, it well may be achieved only once a bunch of states have demonstrated the scare talk is only hot air and manipulation.