Why Fred Thompson is a threat to The Sanctity of Marriage. At least this single girl thinks so anyway.

01 Sep 2007 12:07 am
Posted by: Donna

The Gays!TM are in the forefront this past week, what with the revelation of the June arrest of Larry “Senator Tappy McWideStance”* Craig for soliciting an undercover cop in an airport restroom. And then today, a same sex Iowa couple exchanged legal vows after a judge threw out that state’s same sex marriage ban.   (Their union only lasted a day, since the county won a stay of the judge’s order.)

I’m almost sorry for the GOP at this point.  Hard to rally the base around homophobia when you can’t keep your own leaders from trolling men’s rooms, isn’t it?  But I can only say almost because as we speak their spin machine is whirring along at full bore.  I’ll spare you the details; it’s the fault of liberals.  And Bill Clinton.    

Anyhoo, cognitive dissonance is vexing enough for anyone, but to a reactionary conservative it has to be excruciating.  Witness this poor chap who commented on a creepy clip of Sen. Craig excoriating Clinton back in ’99.  Quoth edger76:

Why should we be ashamed because one man had certain indiscretions?I suppose your moral compass is perfect? PLEASE! Typical liberalism preach tolerance and be the most intolerant group in history next to the Nazi’s and Stalin!It really makes you happy that Craig did this doesnt it? Just goes to show your moral perversian!

edger, my moral compass IS perfect, thank you very much.  So keen, in fact, that I feel obligated to direct your attention to the REAL perversians. The ones who are TRULY threatening traditional families. Sure, you think that white picket fences and well-behaved moppets are safe so long as the hetero-ness of legal marriage is safely codified in law and/or constitutional amendment.  Well, I have news for you, my sadly deluded young friend.   Adam and Steve aren’t going to end your straight marriage by moving into your neighborhood. 

But I’ll tell you who will:  Michael and Catherine-Zeta.  It is my considered opinion that May/December relationships need to be stopped!  You know the type.  Rich old codgers paired with decades-younger trophy wives.  Causing happily married men to consider trading in their loyal spouses and wives to fret over every line and sag.  And think of their poor adult children from the first marriage, having to compete with siblings 30 years younger than them for Dad’s affection and the inheritance!  How about famous men like Donald Trump, parading their progressively nubile-er brides before the world?  The way he promotes the May-December Agenda is sickening.  The last thing I want to see when I’m dining at my favorite Ahwatukee bistro is some pretty young thing draped across Don Imus.  I mean, ick.  Besides, what about the children!!!  These freaks need to keep their deviance to themselves and stop shoving their abnormal lifestyle down everyone’s throats. 

Obviously, what is needed is a law to protect the sanctity of marriage from this scourge.  Therefore, I propose the following ballot initiative:  

TO PRESERVE AND PROTECT MARRIAGE IN THIS STATE, ONLY A UNION BETWEEN A MAN WHO IS NO MORE THAN FIVE YEARS OLDER THAN THE WOMAN SHALL BE VALID OR RECOGNIZED AS A MARRIAGE BY THIS STATE OR ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS AND NO LEGAL STATUS FOR PERSONS WHERE THERE IS A DISPARITY OF MORE THAN FIVE YEARS FROM THE MAN TO THE WOMAN SHALL BE CREATED OR RECOGNIZED BY THIS STATE OR ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS THAT IS SIMILAR TO THAT OF MARRIAGE.  ON THE OTHER HAND, UNIONS WHERE THE WOMAN IS CONSIDERABLY OLDER THAN THE MAN WILL BE FULLY RECOGNIZED.  BECAUSE THE DECEMBER-MAY THING IS TOTALLY COOL.

Who’s with me?  I’m told that the Center for Arizona Policy folks are going to unveil another initiative next year.  This time it will be a “marriage-only” amendment, since their 2006 effort failed, largely due to voters realizing that it would impact many more people besides the gay community.   One good turn deserves another.  If they can use the initiative process to target a minority and deny them rights and privileges, based on their personal opinions about who should be in a relationship, then every other uncommon pairing should be fair game too.  I used age-disparate relationships as an example because everyone has heard the interracial comparison before.  But if you think about the way that every relationship is as unique as a snowflake, it’s ridiculous to pick out characteristics and decide that people can’t marry because they share certain ones, or don’t share others.  

So I guess it’s really none of my business if a man wants to marry a woman young enough to be his daughter, younger than his daughter in fact.

But I will still conclude my inaugural post thusly:

Fred Thompson: Wrong For Marriage, Wrong For America!

Donna

*Thanks to the Stephanie Miller Show for that clever Craig moniker.

No Comments

No comments yet.

Comments RSS TrackBack Identifier URI

Leave a comment

Democratic Diva is proudly powered by WordPress and WPDesigner.