That’s Entertainment!

Rob Tisinai

September 4th, 2014

Court decisions on marriage can be inspiring, lovely, even wry, but they’re rarely laugh-out-loud funny. The 7th Circuit’s decision on Indiana and Wisconsin is an exception.

In the bit I’m about to quote, the court takes on the “responsible procreation argument” that the other side so often puts forth — that the purpose of marriage is to encourage responsible procreation, and because only straight couples can accidentally procreate, only straight couples need the bond of marriage to keep them together and set up a home for the kids. Gay couples, who only have kids on purpose, don’t need any such prodding.

Yes,  the argument is that ridiculous, but the 7th Circuit demolishes it thus:

Heterosexuals get drunk and pregnant, producing unwanted children; their reward is to be allowed to marry. Homosexual couples do not produce unwanted children; their reward is to be denied the right to marry. Go figure.

I see no way of improving on that.

james

September 4th, 2014

The obvious solution to irresponsible pregnancies by opposite sex couples is mandatory abortions for all unwanted pregnancies.

Ben in Oakland

September 5th, 2014

Or mandatory birth control.

Ben in Oakland

September 5th, 2014

I saw that statement as well, Rob. I also thought it was quite funny.

Ben in Oakland

September 5th, 2014

That whole argument is so much nonsense. Marriage exists so that irresponsible straight kids MIGHT possibly marry. Not a word about responsible straight people marrying.

And of course, the many couples we all know that have been together as long as 50 years, demonstrating extreme responsibility in their non-legal marriages, simply don’t count at all.

I think we need to start a campaign that will outlaw marriage on the basis of love, since it’s all about penises and vaginas and bearing children for the state. Because these small government conservatives are claiming all this stuff about the state’s interest in procreation.

Who knew that Mao was a small government conservative?

Ian

September 5th, 2014

Gays are model citizens who can responsibly bring children into their care, so marriage is not required for them. Straight people get drunk and unwanted pregnancies so they need (volunteered) marriage to force them to take care of those unwanted child.

I… don’t know whether i should laugh or cry. To be praised as a model citizen and told that i’m the result of said unwanted pregnancy.

God! Enlighten me!

Tor

September 5th, 2014

They actually used the phrase “go figure???”

JohnnyGA

September 5th, 2014

Among the many gems — but I can’t quite get over the alliterative “Hoosier homosexuals”; the opinion is a thoroughly delightful read!

Paul Douglas

September 7th, 2014

Unbelievable the nonsense that Indiana and Wisconsin’s legal counsel has been spouting. Aren’t they embarrassed? All driven by religious animus and über-conservative politics.
Disgusting.

enough already

September 7th, 2014

This is why the Supreme Court will, under no circumstances, take the 7th Circuit Court’s ruling for consideration.
It will be Louisiana or some such decision which was based entirely on hate-driven Christian values.
Or whatever one calls their hatred of us this week.

jerry

September 8th, 2014

What I have always thought odd is that all of those people claiming that marriage is for the purpose of responsible procreation readily accept marriages where the heterosexual couple cant reproduce or chose not to for medical reasons yet adoption by gay couples aren’t a family.

The glaring omission to their argument is that there is no jurisdiction in the United states or its territories that require couples getting married to either reproduce biologically or adopt if they can’t.

Regan DuCasse

September 11th, 2014

This is why when I see those signs that say, “all children deserve a mom and dad”, the obvious response should be:
MARRIAGE doesn’t require moms, dads or children.

If one had to cut to the damn chase on all this, what is socially, legally and civilly obvious is that the gov’t can’t ensure or enforce WHAT role gender will take between INDIVIDUALS.

Nor can they ensure and enforce a mother and father for children.
Nor can they ensure and enforce that all men and women STAY married, or GET married, whether they have children or not.

There are no morals, skills, fertility, health, religious or endurance tests to be married.
But to hear the arguments of the opposition, there are, ONLY heterosexuals can pass them and a valid defense for discrimination against gay people.
Despite the fact that none of this has anything to do with being gay.

There is no amount of rational logic in their defense. Let alone evidence or facts. And one can’t win a court case without any of one or all of these.

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.

 

Latest Posts

The Things You Learn from the Internet

"The Intel On This Wasn't 100 Percent"

From Fake News To Real Bullets: This Is The New Normal

NC Gov McCrory Throws In The Towel

Colorado Store Manager Verbally Attacks "Faggot That Voted For Hillary" In Front of 4-Year-Old Son

Associated Press Updates "Alt-Right" Usage Guide

A Challenge for Blue Bubble Democrats

Baptist Churches in Dallas, Austin Expelled Over LGBT-Affirming Stance

Featured Reports

What Are Little Boys Made Of?

In this original BTB Investigation, we unveil the tragic story of Kirk Murphy, a four-year-old boy who was treated for “cross-gender disturbance” in 1970 by a young grad student by the name of George Rekers. This story is a stark reminder that there are severe and damaging consequences when therapists try to ensure that boys will be boys.

Slouching Towards Kampala: Uganda’s Deadly Embrace of Hate

When we first reported on three American anti-gay activists traveling to Kampala for a three-day conference, we had no idea that it would be the first report of a long string of events leading to a proposal to institute the death penalty for LGBT people. But that is exactly what happened. In this report, we review our collection of more than 500 posts to tell the story of one nation’s embrace of hatred toward gay people. This report will be updated continuously as events continue to unfold. Check here for the latest updates.

Paul Cameron’s World

In 2005, the Southern Poverty Law Center wrote that “[Paul] Cameron’s ‘science’ echoes Nazi Germany.” What the SPLC didn”t know was Cameron doesn’t just “echo” Nazi Germany. He quoted extensively from one of the Final Solution’s architects. This puts his fascination with quarantines, mandatory tattoos, and extermination being a “plausible idea” in a whole new and deeply disturbing light.

From the Inside: Focus on the Family’s “Love Won Out”

On February 10, I attended an all-day “Love Won Out” ex-gay conference in Phoenix, put on by Focus on the Family and Exodus International. In this series of reports, I talk about what I learned there: the people who go to these conferences, the things that they hear, and what this all means for them, their families and for the rest of us.

Prologue: Why I Went To “Love Won Out”
Part 1: What’s Love Got To Do With It?
Part 2: Parents Struggle With “No Exceptions”
Part 3: A Whole New Dialect
Part 4: It Depends On How The Meaning of the Word "Change" Changes
Part 5: A Candid Explanation For "Change"

The Heterosexual Agenda: Exposing The Myths

At last, the truth can now be told.

Using the same research methods employed by most anti-gay political pressure groups, we examine the statistics and the case studies that dispel many of the myths about heterosexuality. Download your copy today!

And don‘t miss our companion report, How To Write An Anti-Gay Tract In Fifteen Easy Steps.

Testing The Premise: Are Gays A Threat To Our Children?

Anti-gay activists often charge that gay men and women pose a threat to children. In this report, we explore the supposed connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse, the conclusions reached by the most knowledgeable professionals in the field, and how anti-gay activists continue to ignore their findings. This has tremendous consequences, not just for gay men and women, but more importantly for the safety of all our children.

Straight From The Source: What the “Dutch Study” Really Says About Gay Couples

Anti-gay activists often cite the “Dutch Study” to claim that gay unions last only about 1½ years and that the these men have an average of eight additional partners per year outside of their steady relationship. In this report, we will take you step by step into the study to see whether the claims are true.

The FRC’s Briefs Are Showing

Tony Perkins’ Family Research Council submitted an Amicus Brief to the Maryland Court of Appeals as that court prepared to consider the issue of gay marriage. We examine just one small section of that brief to reveal the junk science and fraudulent claims of the Family “Research” Council.

Daniel Fetty Doesn’t Count

Daniel FettyThe FBI’s annual Hate Crime Statistics aren’t as complete as they ought to be, and their report for 2004 was no exception. In fact, their most recent report has quite a few glaring holes. Holes big enough for Daniel Fetty to fall through.