Practically every state in the Union has voted (or is in the process of) banning anything remotely allowing Gays and Lesbians to legally legitimize partnerships.
The “sanctimony of marriage” is spoken in hushed tones, as millions of bubble heads nod in agreement.
And now we have TV shows like, “Married By America” and “Joe Millionaire” and every other “reality” television show that more or less partner celebrity hungry sluts and male whores for “real” weddings.
Where is the indignation for that? What happened to the so-called “sanctimony of marriage”? Am I alone in feeling there is a conspiracy of hypocrisy at work?
Far as I know, no one on these shows are obliged to marry anyone. Even on “Married by America”, the furthest they’re forced to go is engagement. If they choose to marry afterwards, that’s their perogative. Otherwise, these shows are just stupid, stupid, stupid dating services.
Wy not make a RTV show I just made that up, ain’t I clever? I should ™ it. with bible thumpers and male/female whore-sluts meeting for the purpose of psuedo-dating/marriage for the grand prize of money.
I don’t watch those or any other “reality” shows…they are pure crap. It is a damned shame that the potential of television is wasted with this s**t. WE (the people) are becoming more ignorant everyday I fear.
w/ the possible exception of a very small group who shall remain nameless at this time… Shirley
“Wy not make a RTV show I just made that up, ain’t I clever? I should ™ it. with bible thumpers and male/female whore-sluts meeting for the purpose of psuedo-dating/marriage for the grand prize of money.”
Well, I think DMark’s point is, you don’t have to go to church to hear folks protesting gay marriage. No, they’re out passing laws just to preclude the possibility of the State recognizing (for example) my aunt’s marriage to the woman she’s been with for 20 years, helped raise a child with, and loves deeply. As that would “degrade” marriage.
But the union of two strangers brought together by thousands of other strangers basing their decision on their own amusement factor, that being recognized by the State as “real” marriage(unlike my aunt’s fake one)…that’s ok. Or at least, merits nothing more than mildly deploring it in church.
I think you’ll find that the difference isn’t what “bible thumpers” think about the different issues, but simply that the media doesn’t pick up on it and blow it all out of proportion
Without weighing in on either side of this issue, I believe that opinion poles show a clear majority of Americans do not favor gay marriage. There are many, many folks other than Bible Thumpers on that side of the issue. The “Bible Thumpers” do not talk so much about the quality of any given marriage, but rather that marriage is between a man and a woman. And while these so-called Bible Thumpers may not be out protesting Reality Shows, I’d wager some big bucks that if you polled them, they would disaprove of “Married by America”, etc.
So, DMark, what is your point other than that you don’t like “Bible Thumpers”?
All true. Most people are opposed to gay marriage (of course, no one is asking them to enter into one.) And BT do obiously focus on marriage being between a man and a woman, to the exclusion of all else- that was kind of DMark’s point. But how do they justify making this the law of the land in a country not ruled by Deuternomy? They talk about how it degrade a sacred institition. They come up with a lot of justifications that don’t hold water if they’re not applied to shit like “Married by America” as well. Which if we discount, they’re left with “We think sex between two guy/two girls is icky” which I’m afraid is just not enough to justify a law.
**
I repeat, his point would be that there’s a huge difference between privately deploring something and publicly campaining for a law that will affect other people’s lives.
—Which if we discount, they’re left with “We think sex between two guy/two girls is icky” which I’m afraid is just not enough to justify a law.—
I hope you don’t mean that in a Constitutional sense. The SC is happy to call the majority finding something to be icky a “compelling state interest,” even if the standard is simply that the law be rational (since there’s no Constitutional right to have sex in the ways you want).
I really really don’t care if what these people approve or disapprove of. The can spend all night talking about how much they don’t like gay marriages. They can preach about it in church.
But when they start passing laws, I get a bit upset. There has been a pre-emptive legal assault on the very idea of gay marriges. The California constitution has been ammended to say “A marriage is between a man and woman”, before any gay marriage bills were even considered. This means that in order for gay marriage to ever be a reality, they will need to overturn this ammendment and pass a law for gay marriage.
So why arn’t they asking for laws regulating or banning reality-TV show marriages? Why does this ‘desecration of marriage’ deserve only private snickering, while gay marriage deserves legal action?
There was an article in World (a “bible-thumping” magazine that my parents subscribe to) actually praising these shows because they at least elevate marriage to an “ideal” state. Premarital sex and the like are defaming marriage, it says, therefore anything which elevates marriage is good. (Let me assure you that this magazine is about as conservative as you can get).
I think that the “reality shows” can get away with it because they are promoting a more traditional union. They show the classic archetype of boy meets girl and they live happily ever after, which has become part of the collective morality. For some people boy meets boy or girl meets girl just doesn’t fit into their narrow view of what the world should be. I think that the reason they are trying to outlaw gay marriages is because, for some people, any deviation of dissention from the perceived norm has to be stopped.
