Don’t you just love it when bigots lay out their “scientific” reasons for hating various minorities? Here’s Minnesotan Mark Hayes explaining why he plans to vote in support of an anti-gay-marriage constitutional amendment that Christian-Right groups successfully got on the November 2012 ballot:
It wouldn’t be pretty. [laughs] My response to one of my daughters would be … would be a lot like Katrina hitting New Orleans. It would not be good. That’s about all I can say about it. I’m not sure exactly what my reaction would be, but I know that it would be a bad day. [laughs]
Yeah, blowing up in your kids’ face when they come out of the closet – so funny! On the other hand, at least his daughters are now warned that they would be much better off confiding in someone else.
But wait, he’s just getting started:
My name is Mark Hayes and I’m voting “yes” on the marriage amendment because of my scientific experience [of] reproduction being a basic facet of existence for all organisms. Same-sex marriage flies in the face of that. For any organism, be it animal, plant or human, the reproductive urge is very significant as a driving force in life. As a matter of fact, it is one of the seven qualities to dictate whether something is alive or not.
And here we have yet another incarnation of the tired old naturalistic fallacy, wherein homosexuality is supposedly wrong because same-sex fornication doesn’t lead to impregnation. This is essentially derived from animal behavior (not that a whole slew of critters don’t also enjoy doin’ the hunky-funky with members of the same gender), as bigots like to assert that because homosexuality wouldn’t lead to procreation, ergo, it is against natural law. Of course, this sort of thinking completely ignores the facts that A) we have various means to grant children to couples who, for whatever reason, are unable to have any, and B) humans are driven by more than blind instinct. We can think and rationalize, thus allowing us to do all sorts of things that the rest of the animal kingdom doesn’t engage in. If we truly were to limit ourselves to behaviors exhibited by other creatures, we wouldn’t wear clothes, cook our food, spend hours in traffic or enjoy the luxury that is central heating. Although, we would also be free to do things that are currently frowned upon, such as killing our mates and eating our young.
My, isn’t natural law ever so freeing?
And it gets even better:
If you look up the definition of “disease”, that definition includes “anything that impedes one of those seven characteristics that define life”. Therefore, homosexuality as a state, status, however you wish to phrase it, falls under “disease” as stated in the science of biology.
First of all, I did look it up. Nothing I found came close to matching that supposed definition, much less applying to same-sex attraction. I’m also quite sure there’s a fundamental distinction between an abnormality in a person’s physiology or psychology, and an inherent trait that’s part of their genetic make-up without affecting their ability to procreate, even if they require some assistance to do so (re: artificial insemination, etc.). Unless being attracted to others who share your type of genitals somehow simultaneously eliminates your gametes, then this explanation is entirely bullshit.
Hayes then goes on about how same-sex parenting is bad for kids and single parents are preferable, and how children of same-sex parents might be more likely to turn out gay (which studies show is only true insofar as kids raised in a loving same-sex household are less likely to be close-minded and ignore or deny their own latent homosexuality, should it arise). And after all that, he then goes on to say this (with a remarkably straight face):
I see same-sex marriage as this division of camps, like Republicans and Democrats, where “oh, that’s a Democrat” or “that’s a Republican”, and “we don’t deal with those people”. And that’s wrong.
So, the guy who’s smearing gays and lesbians as “diseased” and unfit parents and who pledges to vote in favor of discriminating against them – and who, again, promises to erupt in anger if his daughters tell him something about their sexuality that contradicts his narrow-minded beliefs – is accusing gays of promoting “division”.
One thing you gotta hand to those homophobes – they really do own half the world’s reserves of chutzpah.
Edit (12/17/11 9:42 AM) – Changed “spending intimate time” to “doin’ the hunky-funky”. ’Cause it sounds funnier.
(via Joe. My. God.)