Sunday, January 25, 2009

Rebuttal to Debra Saunders

In this article: The Gay Community is Losing Friends, by Debra Saunders, published in the San Francisco Chronicle today, Saunders claims that there has been, "too little recognition of the fact that marriage has been limited to unions with the opposite sex since about as long as there have been laws." She further asserts that the, "gay community's failure to show tolerance," is simply fueling the culture war, and making it harder for gay people to be treated fairly. Here is my rebuttal to her:

Dear Ms. Saunders,

I am disgusted and appalled to see a woman write something like this. You realize of course that historically women have been non-citizens, treated as property and deprived of basic human rights, relegated to sex toys and domestic help, lower than a servant in many cases. You realize of course, that this kind of treatment of women is still going on across the world, and even in America, the "land of the free" women have only been granted full citizenship since 1920, less than 2 full lifetimes. There are millions of American women still living who remember when they could not vote, or wear pants, or have jobs, or make their own medical and legal decisions. So, according to your logic that gay Americans should not be allowed to marry because it would overturn thousands of years of human history, I suppose you believe that about woman's rights as well. Accordingly, you should definitely quit your job, since a woman working outside the home is an affront to human history. And please don't vote. And if you're not married -- to a man -- you should be. And, any education you've had beyond finishing school and possibly some arts & languages, you should certainly not display, as education, intelligence, and ability are the purview of men according to your theory, and it would be inappropriate of you to seem their equal. And if you own any property, you should sign it over to your husband, or your father if you are unmarried, immediately. To selectively grant right to citizens, as you should be able to see, is not democracy or liberty, and is contrary to the wishes and directives of our founding principles. I'll also offer a history lesson, as you seem to need one: legal marriage has been a function of paternal descent for as long as there have been laws; these same laws are the origins of the subjugation of women as well, so in fact, you and gay people share a common plight, a human rights crisis with a common, global ancestor.

2 comments:

Mike D'Virgilio said...

Kyle, thought you might (not) like to see my reply to Debra:

Reading your article I couldn't help wonder why so few people get the real agenda of homosexual activists regarding marriage. It really is rather simple. The California Supreme Court declared in its May ruling last year that same sex marriage is analogous to the racism of not allowing blacks and whites to marry in years past.

The connection is purposeful, because these activists want to stigmatize all who don't see homo and heterosexuality as morally equal. That is why they use words like hate and bigot for such people. To believe as I do that homosexual activity is sinful and wrong and not healthy in any way, is to invite scorn and derision equal to be being branded a racist.

So marriage is a ruse, a Trojan horse to codify the homosexual activists', and secular leftists' in general, morality into law, and then force everyone who doesn't agree with them into the closet. Isn't that ironic.

Kyle Sennett said...

Mike, I'm publishing your comment, even though I don't agree with you on the moral issue.