Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Cal Thomas: Battle Is Lost

Jim Burroway

April 7th, 2009

Conservative columnist Cal Thomas is most definitely against same-sex marriage, and more broadly he has little good to say about the gay rights movement (”They have taken advantage of a morally exhausted nation…”). He is pretty sure that the court decision in Iowa will “dismantle the foundations of our nation” and open the floodgates to polygamy. But with all that, he knows when the party’s over:

To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve “traditional marriage” in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings? Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention?

…The battle over same-sex marriage is on the way to being lost. For conservatives who still have faith in the political system to reverse the momentum, you are—to recall Harold Hill—“closing your eyes to a situation you do not wish to acknowledge.”

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

David
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

I wouldn’t think the evangelical community and those wanting to “save traditional marriage” crowd so hypocritical if they were addressing the demise of heterosexual marriage within their own ranks. How can a minister advocate protecting heterosexual marriage when he divorces his wife and marries her best friend because God told him to, and then stays in the pulpit and on tv. To me it seems more of a money making ploy, because as soon as they tell you how bad the “gay menace” is and how much money they have they hit you up for a donation.

Attmay
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

Yikes. He should have never have shaved his mustache.

These people spent so much time pointing out non-existent specks in others’ eyes when there were redwood logs in their own. It’s a wonder anyone gave them credibility on any issue.

Ben in Oakland
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

“To those on the political and religious right who are intent on continuing the battle to preserve “traditional marriage” in a nation that is rapidly discarding its traditions, I would ask this question: What poses a greater threat to our remaining moral underpinnings? Is it two homosexuals living together, or is it the number of heterosexuals who are divorcing and the increasing number of children born to unmarried women, now at nearly 40 percent?”

Good for him. At least he was willing to tell the truth, and stop blaming gay people for what heterosexuals have been doing to The Holy Family.

His conclusion, however, was unfortunate. It is not that the political system has not been working, it was working all too well, fueled by hate and bigotry and religious intolerance, rather than knowledge, compassion, and progress.

Prop. 8 is the perfect example. It barely passed, and would never have passed has its supporters not resorted a campaign of lies and fear mongering, and had our side not run a campaign from the dark recesses of the closet.

What Mr. thomas is saying is that the tide is inexorably turning, and he doesn’t like it one bit. But barring a coup, maybe it’s time for good Christians to stop seeking the speck in their gay brothers’ and sisters’ eyes and start noticing the logs.

I find it interesting that while Mr. thomas is willing to accept heterosexual repsonsibility for the immorality of what they do to their families, somehow we immensely powerful and ever resourceful gay people have manged to pick on a morally exhausted nation like the bullies we clearly are, forcing them to abandon all principle or morality or something because They Just Couldn’t Take It Anymore.

Bad homos. Bad. Bad. Bad.

Or as I like to put it, heterosexuals behave badly, and gay people bear the blame or the punishment. but it’s a little twisted here, because heterosexists-rightwingers-homophobes-whathaveyou are acknowledging their responsibility. but they still want to blame gay people, because they are not behaving how they think they ought to, which is not about minding their own marriages, but about blaming gay people for every ill in society.

David Phillips
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

All of that pissing and moaning, and he doesn’t have the courtesy to spontaneously combust for a finale??!! Glad to see one wingnut has come to his senses partly re sustaining married couples; now, if he’d just get over the hating.

Rick R. Reed
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

However couched, it’s still nice to see that the more common sense marriage “problem” to work on is not keeping apart two people who love one another, but helping those who have already made the commitment sustain it.

Alex
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

Did anyone else find it ironic that an anti-gay columnist compared the situation in Iowa to a musical?

Pender
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

What’s hilarious to me is that he holds up Harold Hill from the Music Man as a model citizen for calling out corruption and degradation — when Hill was basically a scam artist trading on the town’s irrational hysteria to take advantage of them.

What an unintentionally perfect summary of the professional anti-gay organizations of America.

Ben in Oakland
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

brilliant, pender. send that to Mr. thomas

Richard W. Fitch
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

I only read Cal Thomas’ column AFTER I’ve taken my blood pressure medicine. He is one of the most smug, arrogant and condescending people in print. He did such a good job of stating the conditions, why the hell couldn’t he have stated the logical conclusion????

David C.
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

He did such a good job of stating the conditions, why the hell couldn’t he have stated the logical conclusion????
—Richard W. Fitch

Perhaps because by doing so, he would have provided all that was needed to complete refutation of many if not all common arguments against same-sex marriage, and that attribution of moral decline to the extension of full civil protections to gay people was fallacious from the beginning.

Ben in Oakland
April 7th, 2009 | LINK

Davcid: that is what I was trying to say. thank you for making it clear.

Lynn David
April 8th, 2009 | LINK

At least he’s pragmatic; would that all the rest would be so.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.