Guy Benson is a conservative talk radio personality” at Fox News. He made headlines last week after he proposed the impossible to a man in a rowboat in France.
What makes the story interesting were the more than two thousand positive responses Benson garnered, many from prominent “conservatives”. Conservative bad boy columnist Kurt Schlichter tweeted a picture of clinking champagne glasses. Associate Editor at Commentary Noah Rothman said congratulations. As did Jonah Goldberg and the Iowa Hawk David Burge. Republican National Committee member Harmeet K. Dhillon wished happiness. War strategist talking head David Reaboi said Mazel Tov.
Dozens and dozens of Blue Cheka (Twitter verified users) journalists from the Wall Street Journal, Fox News, Washington Examiner, National Review, and so on gushed with enthusiasm.
And no less than Brett Baier said “Guy — congratulations! It takes guts to ask in a wobbly boat — all the best. Thanks for sharing the moment. Love is cool.”
Baier, who is Catholic, forgot that supporting the intrinsically disordered desire for sodomy is not love. Real love would have said, “Men, you are imperiling your immortal souls. Do not do this.”
Perhaps Twitter censored negative responses, because I was unable to discover any, or perhaps those who understood marriage between two men is metaphysically impossible, fearing the mob, kept their mouths shut. Either way, given the enthusiasm for Benson’s folly from those ostensibly on the right, the results from Gallup’s new polls on (let us call it) non-traditional sexuality will come as no surprise.
First Poll
The first is “Two in Three Americans Support Same-Sex Marriage.” Two in three Americans, in other words, have forgotten the reality that matrimony can only exist between men and women.
Twenty years ago the proportion was just over one in four. Support has steadily grown. If the trend holds, in a decade we can expect something pushing 90%.
There are still some differences between Democrats as Republicans. Eighty-three percent of Democrats support fictional marriage—and not 100%, as might be expected. Republicans are closing in on 50%. If the responses to Benson are any guide, the rate among prominent Republicans is probably higher.
Gallup’s bottom line said it best:
With the third anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision nearing and no formidable opposition trying to undo gay marriage’s legality, it’s likely that the percentage of married LGBT adults in the U.S. will continue to grow as new generations of same-sex couples enjoy their newfound rights.
Second Poll
Poll number two is “In U.S., Estimate of LGBT Population Rises to 4.5%.”
Gallup’s tracking for those identifying as LGBT didn’t start until 2012, when 5.8% of Millennials claimed to have non-biological “orientations”. That number soared to 8.2% in five short years. To find out the third poll, the consequences of all three, and predictions for the future, click here to read the rest.
Bonus The predictions are along the lines of this mandatory reading (more on this later).
The road to Hell is wide and paved. All believers know that. No one else cares—they believe there are not consequences to bad behavior. They don’t see connections, and do not care even if they do. What’s abuse of women and children, sexually transmitted diseases, mass killing, and so forth if it avoids those pesky rules people don’t like? Put bluntly, the world is intent on suicide and will stop at nothing to get there. After another 500 years of violence and cruel dictatorships, a few will awaken for a brief couple of hundred years again and there will be momentary freedom and love of God. Humans flat out love being tortured, starved and enslaved if they can bang whatever moves, live like there’s no tomorrow, etc. Come on, we all know this and there is no end on this earth. You can write all day, but you will not win (I realize you may not want to win—you’re just explaining so ignorance cannot be claimed by the immoral). The wide and paved path is where the fools travel and it has been so since Adam and Eve. The vast majority of humans do not ever learn.
It is politically correct, and therefor not news, to support same sex marriage. It is not surprising that economic conservatives would choose to go along to get along. Brett Baier would hurt his career by opposing gay marriage. Media folks are not supposed to make the news, only report it.
There is no such thing as gay “marriage”. Just because you call a tail a leg does not make it so. If you legislate pi to be exactly 3.2, that does not make it so.
Only one State legislated in favor of destroying the simple definition of marriage. And that was after their people overwhelmingly passed a referendum against it. Every single other State had it legalized by a federal court judge – several of them being gay themselves. Then, when enough “precedence” had been set, the USSC decided, in direct contravention to the Constitution, that the States had no right to legislate on the issue.
Well, I suppose it was only a matter of time until McChuck came out in favor of pedophiles and their predatory agenda. At least he’s being honest about it.
For those of faith, what ever happened to ‘hate the sin but love the sinner’?
Before legislated marriage gays were cohabitating anyway, state-sanctioned marriage merely added a number of benefits to the existing behavior/living arrangement, much of which are financial (e.g. probate/transfer of assets, employer medical benefits extended to a spouse, etc.). Such is the basis of equal rights per the 14th amendment — gays living a lifestyle that, had they been straight would have included benefits such as probate were denied by anti-gay marriage laws. Justice Kennedy’s ramblings aside, there is some legislative basis for the SCOTUS decision allowing gay marriage. That’s a separate and distinct set of benefits from the Sacrament of marriage, which do not arise from the State.
Many of the religious (including the pompous religious hypocrites) carry on as if the State were sanctioning the sacrament.
Whatever makes a person gay isn’t affected by that the openness facilitated by things like pro-gay-marriage law; such social acceptance isn’t going to cause more people to become gay, but it does facilitate making them more visible. And that seems to be the real issue–many would prefer an illusion of a “straight” society to the reality. That’s too bad, because reality won’t go away (and gay marriage/rights doesn’t materially alter much of anything … except the view “straights” have to see).
That aside, believers are still required to live by the “Golden Rule” — do unto others as you’d have them do unto you. Which means setting an example, not barging into other’s lives uninvited and telling them they’re evil and doomed unless…and so on and so forth… which is about as effective as others telling believers what’s wrong with their particular religious doctrine vs another — how many of you have ever been so informed, such as, “you are imperiling your immortal souls. Do not do this,” and concluded, ‘gee, I’ve been wrong about baptism [or whatever], I’m switching from [Baptist, etc.] to [Catholic, etc.]’?
Nobody, none of you, is probably pretty close to the exact answer, if not precisely the answer. Thus, we observe the apex of hypocrisy with the likes of this: “Real love would have said, “Men, you are imperiling your immortal souls. Do not do this.”” That’s not “real love,” ineffective [has this ever worked, ever?!?!?!?!] and obviously in direct contradiction to what the speaker would like directed toward them-self in an analogous situation — what that is is conceit, the expression of arrogant superiority masquerading as wholesomeness.
@Ken
Gay marriage isn’t the point, the legal sanction provides a club to use on believers in exactly the ways it’s proponents said would never happen.
Bake the cake, sign the document, pay the benefit, use the right pronoun or else.
It doesn’t hurt anyone else and the higher rate of disease, domestic violence, drug use, and sexual crimes against the underage is just an accident. Gay men are significantly more likely to have been molested, but that’s just because predators sensed they were gay already. Doctors can tell you that anal sex has consequences on its own, incidentally; homosexuals do not age well.
You can’t hate the sin without hating the sin. We’re “understanding” our way all the way into hell. There is a terrifying aspect to the gay community that we all know of but nobody wants to talk about. Remember it affects no one but the participants that’s just who they are and love is love even if everyone involved seems more likely to die.
Also remember you’re a hypocrite unless you’re sinless so you have no right to say anything to anybody about anything; don’t look up the Greek root of hypocrite it will only confuse you.
I know several conservatives and persons of faith who have, to put it in terms so often stated here, updated their priors concerning homosexuality because:
* Their views were conditioned on a set of priors they were forbidden to update, whether self- or externally- imposed
* As acceptance of homosexuality grew, people they long knew and respected as conservatives “came out”, demonstrating that other core beliefs they held were not conditioned on sexual orientation
* Some even realized that although they had great faith in The Church, for a good portion of their lifetimes the same church had not recanted the persecution of Galileo. Yet they themselves would not condemn his heresies
And, upon reflection of those updates, it may sometimes lay bare the fact that by compartmentalizing this set of beliefs for special treatment, individuals who value and otherwise are guided their critical thinking skill can betray their own commitment to consistency and clear thought:
A good example is presenting the sexualization of young children – where that sexualization has a homosexual orientation – as a condemnation of homosexuality, and little else. It is a tacit implication that the wrong being done in such a case is the existential property of being homosexual. Let’s not argue that at this moment, and instead consider predictive power: considering homosexuality as an attribute of population members, its predictive power wrt measurably negative life outcomes is far less clear-cut than the predictive power of sexualization of young children, whether of a heterosexual or homosexual nature.
A persons beliefs are their beliefs and cannot necessarily be proven. Unless they seek to harm others because of those beliefs, I feel it would be vulgar of me to condemn or criticize such beliefs. And I was not always that way: I updated my priors over my lifetime as I learned that many whose social views were unaligned with my own, nonetheless shared most of the same core values but expressed them in a different way. Usually, we seem to all care in making the world a better place in a meaningful way
Lee-
Are you bereft of a dictionary? Paedophilia is defined as sex between an adult and a pre-pubescent child (generally cross-gendered). What you seem to be referring to (in your everlasting hatred of Catholic-only clergy, but no one else) is actually predatory homosexuality, almost always between an adult and a POST-pubescent adolescent. And almost always, same-sex. All of which tells me you simply have an agenda, because of course, you’re not un-intelligent. Just warped.
John – You’re quite right. Lee seems a bit unhinged, as Leftism requires. But he/she’s not stupid. There’s none so blind as those who just won’t see.