I’ve heard this argument – a la Hitler’s “big lie” – so many times that if I’d vomited every time I heard it, I would have barfed myself into vapor by now. That’s why they call it “ad nauseum,” I suppose.
“Everyone has a fundamental right to marry,” we’re told. And so homosexual marriage is not merely a Constitutional issue, but a human rights issue.
But here’s the damn obvious question: when have homosexuals EVER been denied the right to marry?
A homosexual can marry anybody of the opposite sex of maritable age and status who will have them, the same as everybody else. Nobody has had their right to marry deprived from them.
I challenge anybody to find me an example of a single case in which a homosexual was denied the right to marry, given what marriage is: the union between one man and one woman. Just find me one time when a homosexual tried to marry and was denied the right to do so.
Let’s put it this way: if homosexuals are somehow being defined as having been denied the right to marry, you have to employ a definition of “marriage” that no society has ever before embraced. Which is to say that you literally have to assume what you want to prove and then use what you just assumed as your “proof.” To wit, “marriage” is the union between a man and a woman under God. That is what it has ALWAYS been. Which is why no civilization has ever called for homosexual marriage. And unless you assume that marriage is somehow something else (which it isn’t and has never been), no homosexual has EVER been denied “the right to marry.”
That’s what we call facts. That’s what we call logic. That’s what we call morality. And that’s what we call history. Homosexual marriage fails on all counts. It is an oxymoron. “Homosexual marriage” is like “liquid solid.” It is like “adult children.” You can’t have both. It is either one or the other. Unless you want think of “adult children” in the Obamanomics sense in which young people have been “fundamentally transformed” into permanent “children” because they’ll never be able to get a job in this disastrous economy and will therefore be helpless dependents forever. In that Orwellian sense in which “freedom is slavery” and “ignorance is strength,” I suppose anything is possible – even “homosexual marriage.”
“Homosexual marriage” is non sequitur unless you begin by perverting the thing in language that you then want to pervert in actuality. When I hear somebody mouthing this idiocy of homosexuals being denied the right to marry, I know that I am in the presence of a true moral and intellectual idiot. And I excuse myself in search of somebody who is actually worth having an intellectual conversation with.
If homosexuals don’t want to marry, fine by me. But don’t whine because you don’t want what decent, healthy people want.
Homosexuals don’t want the right to marry; they want the right to pervert the institution of marriage. Period.