Skip to main content

Black pastors condemn Obama's equation of marriage redefinition with civil rights

The leader of a coalition of African-American clergy has called President Obama's equation of gay "marriage" with civil rights "a disgrace to the black community."

"I marched with many people back in those days and I have reached out to some of my friends who marched with me, and all of them are shocked,” said the Rev. William Owens of the Coalition of African American Pastors (CAAP). “They never thought they would see this day that gay rights would be equated with civil rights. Not one agreed with this comparison.”

“President Obama didn’t march,” Owens said. “He has benefited from those of us who did march, but for President Obama to say we marched so that gays would have the right to marry today, is a disgrace and a lie.”

The traditional rationale for giving marriage a special legal status is its role in the bearing and raising of children. The nature of heterosexual behavior promotes this, and thus only heterosexual couples have been allowed to marry. But the sexual revolution's divorce of sex from commitment and child-bearing, together with a tendancy in recent years to see marriage more as an affectional arrangement between two people than as the foundation of the family, has blurred the rationale of marriage and allowed gay and lesbian rights advocates to suggest that there is no qualitative difference between their relationships and heterosexual ones. The rarity of monogamy among long-term male gay couples and the instability of lesbian relationships raise additional questions concerning the impact of same-sex "marriage" on the institution of marriage itself.

But ignoring these issues and suppressing attempts to debate them, liberal opinion-makers consistently equate the movement for gay "marriage" with the movement for civil, legal and social equality for African-Americans with whites. But nobody questions the equality of gay and lesbian persons; the issue is the equivalence of their relationships with heterosexual relationships in terms of their value to society. and the impact of redefining marriage on the institution itself.

The NAACP, President Obama, and the Left generally have begged the real issues by making this false equation, even manipulating the debate through the introduction of the term "marriage equality" when marriage redefinition is the real issue. The liberal media have cooperated. The result is that only one side of this "debate" is allowed to be heard.

Not surprisingly, a plurality of highly-propagandized American public has changed its views on same-sex "marriage" in recent years. Despite the propaganda of the social Left, however, the nation remains almost evenly divided on the question- something one would never guess from the Leftist-dominated popular culture.

The revisionist coup is expected to have its ultimate success later this summer, when a highly-propagandized Supreme Court is expected to overrule two thousand years of precedent and the entire history of the legal basis and rationale for marriage by forbidding states to withhold marriage licenses from same-sex couples.


Popular posts from this blog

Jan Chamberlain's rhetoric is too strong. But the stand she has taken is right.

I do not share the religion of Jan Chamberlain. I don't even pray to the same god. But I can't help but admire the integrity of the woman who quit the Mormon Tabernacle Choir rather than sing at Donald Trump's inauguration.

Ms. Chamberlain, like me, voted for Evan McMullin in November. Like me, she holds no brief for Hillary Clinton or her agenda. But she cannot, as she put it, "throw roses at Hitler."

As I've said before, comparing Trump to Hitler strikes me as harsh. I believe that Trump is a power-hungry narcissist who exhibits disturbing signs of psychopathy, like Hitler. Like Hitler, he has stigmatized  defenseless minorities- Muslims and undocumented aliens, rather than Jews- and made them scapegoats for the nation's troubles. Like Hitler, he has ridden a wave of irrational hatred and emotion to power. Like Hitler's, his agenda foreshadows disaster for the nation he has been chosen to lead.

But he's not going to set up death camps for Musli…

Neither Evan McMullin nor his movement are going away

Evan McMullin has devoted most of his post-college life- even to the point of foregoing marriage and a family- to fighting ISIS and al Qaeda and our nation's deadliest enemies as a clandestine officer for the CIA. He has done so at the risk of his life.

He has seen authoritarianism in action close-up. One of his main jobs overseas was to locate and facilitate the elimination of jihadist warlords. Evan McMullin knows authoritarians.

And when he looks at Donald Trump, what he sees is an authoritarian like the ones he fought overseas. He knows Donald Trump. After leaving the CIA he served as policy director for the Republican majority in the United States House of Representatives. He tells about his first encounter with The Donald in that role in this opinion piece he wrote for today's New York Times.

In fact, when Mitt Romney and Tom Coburn and all the others who were recruited to run as a conservative third-party candidate against Trump and Hillary Clinton backed out,  McMulli…

Huzzah! Once again, 45 does something majorly right!

First. he appointed Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court, and now 45 has- at long last- initiated a sensible space policy, with a plan to promote a "rapid and affordable" return to the moon carried out by private enterprise by 2020.  Afterward, it will be onward to Mars and beyond.

This is a great idea for three reasons. First, private enterprise is the future of space exploration, and as far as I know we will be the first spacefaring nation to put most of its eggs in that basket. Second, it's nice to have eggs! Since the Obama administration canceled the Constellation program to develop the Ares booster and the Orion crew vehicle (though it subsequently reinstated the Orion part of the program), the United States has been twiddling its thumbs while China has taken great leaps toward the moon and other countries- including Russia, India, and Japan- have to various degrees intensified their own space programs. It would be both tragic and foolhardy for the nation which first…