Stephanie Salter: Gays a threat to institution of marriage? Get real

The Tribune-Star ^ | June 11, 2006 | Stephanie Salter

[Military family member]

I’m rarely lifted by some occurrence under the Capitol dome, but 48 members of the Senate provided an exception this week: They spared us the protracted and dangerous distraction of a federal battle over gay marriage.

That even five minutes was spent on this issue — let alone all the words poured out about the need for a constitutional amendment to “protect” marriage — illustrates how far our nation is from getting its priorities in order and its act together.

You know, the act we need to perfect so we can seriously deal on the global stage with real political, economic, security and environmental threats to our well-being?

Now, before some of you rev up the e-mail and phone trees — the ones that tell me in 25 formulated words or more that I should go back to San Francisco where all those Sodomites flout their abomination before God and country — I have a few things to say that might save you the trouble.

No. 1: I have no “gay agenda.” I am a lifelong heterosexual, born and raised in Indiana, who developed my advocacy for gay rights here in the heartland. The first gay person I knew I met in high school.

During my four years at Purdue — a stand-up, state-supported university chock-full of white-bread kids like me — I got to know many more gay women and men. I learned at an early age that homosexuals are people who are much more like heterosexuals than they aren’t.

We laughed at the same jokes, danced to the same music, struggled similarly through algebra or English lit, worried equally about our post-graduation employability and made sure we got home for our parents’ birthdays. Sometimes, late at night, as we shared a beer or a walk across campus, we confided the same personal dream: to love and be loved.

So, don’t blame San Francisco. I equated gay rights with human rights long before I left Indiana.

No. 2: As Vice President Dick Cheney can and will tell you, truly knowing and loving a gay man or lesbian makes you look at discrimination against homosexuals in a whole different way.

Denying two adults the legal, social and economic benefits that come with a state-sanctioned union is flat-out, unequivocal discrimination. Deliberately meting out injustice — with a constitutional amendment, no less — won’t protect the institution of marriage. But it will eat away at the democratic, egalitarian values that made this country different from any other on Earth.

The preamble to the Declaration of Independence says Americans have certain inalienable rights — among them life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness — that are endowed by our Creator. Which brings me to my next point.

No. 3: In addition to being straight, I am a practicing Christian. If somebody managed to prove tomorrow that God does not exist, I would go on using Jesus as my guide.

So, how important was the issue of homosexuality to Jesus? How many times did he speak about it, make certain his disciples were clear on the subject, construct a parable for the masses so they could grasp the significance of it in their lives?

Zero. None. Never.

Of all the statements attributed to Jesus, not one includes same-gender sleeping arrangements. If homosexuality is such a threat to humankind’s communion with God, wouldn’t you think his son might at least have mentioned it?

What is most important to God is no mystery. Over and over Christ said to take care of the poor, to visit the sick and imprisoned. He told us to be quiet about our charity, not advertise it, and to ignore class and ethnic barriers and be good Samaritans to all in need.

Lest we be so thick-headedly human and forget, in Matthew, Mark and Luke he drew a line under and around his top priorities: “This is my first commandment: Love God with all your heart and soul and mind. And love your neighbor as yourself.”

In John, he made it sublimely simple: “This is my commandment: Love one another as I have loved you.” Period. No exceptions for gays.

No. 4: In the three decades I lived in San Francisco, I got to know lots more gay men and lesbians. They were my neighbors, my co-workers, my fellow parishioners, my elected leaders, my dear friends.

Some of the gay couples I know have been together for most of their adult lives. Many have children upon whom they dote, over whom they worry and for whom they provide, plan and dream.

Like millions of Americans, these committed gays earn a living, pay their taxes, borrow money to fix up their homes, take medicine for their hypertension, watch “Survivor,” cash in air miles for vacations, volunteer their spare time, walk their dogs and, once in awhile, surprise their longtime partner with a romantic anniversary card after all the years.

What exactly in that behavior is dangerous to marriage? The heterosexual U.S. divorce-marriage ratio is 1-to-2. When is the last time you heard anybody cite “gay Americans” as the reason their marriage busted up?

The only thing that will protect the institution of marriage is more good marriages. If we really wanted to reinforce and defend marriage, we as a society would go after the real enemies of healthy, responsible, respectful relationships. And we would say, “Hooray!” to any couple willing to commit themselves to a life together.

Then maybe we could get on as a people — and a government — with combating bona fide abominations.

You know, abominations such as ignorance and fear? Prejudice and poverty? Waste, greed, hunger, war and — the ultimate abomination, according to Jesus — hatred?

Stephanie Salter can be reached at (812) 231-4229 or stephanie.salter@tribstar.com

[Military family member]

A local Girl who went to Purdue, then to San Francisco, then returned home.

Let's Freeper her back to the stone-age

[xcamel]

Not important? Wrong priorities? Bigger Problems?

~~horsehockey~~

If this is/was the case, why are they willing to co-opt every civil rights struggle ever conceived to get their way?

[brivette]

agreed

[madprof98]

In addition to being straight, I am a practicing Christian. If somebody managed to prove tomorrow that God does not exist, I would go on using Jesus as my guide.

Sounds more like a practicing Unitarian.

[Military family member]

Her entire job seems to consist of writing about how Terre Haute, Indiana is not San Francisco.

I say, Thank God!

[JustaDumbBlonde]

Don't look now Stephanie ... but anyone who so vigorously defends the gay lifestyle as being just like anyone else's does have a gay agenda.

[satchmodog9]

Typical liberal bromides of ignorance, hatred and fear.

[Just mythoughts]

The past decade has been about the "specialness" of the gayness of being 'gay'. Now that the separateness of the gayness has been established they are going to claim similarity and sameness? H E L L O!!!!

[MACVSOG68]

Let's Freeper her back to the stone-age

Yeah, let's not bother to shoot down what she said. Besides we all know she's just another liberal trying to confuse our convictions with facts.

[ROTB]

>How many times did he speak about it, make certain his
>disciples were clear on the subject, construct a parable for
>the masses so they could grasp the significance of it in
>their lives?

>Zero. None. Never.

Have you not read that from the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female' and said, 'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore, what God has joined together, no human being must separate."
Matthew 19:4-6

1) man shall be joined to wife
2) not three, not four or more, but *two*

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Besides we all know she's just another liberal trying to confuse our convictions with facts.

The facts of life are biological... male + female = baby... it happens no other way...

She is just another liberal living in a fetish fantasy world of desolate infertility...

[L98Fiero]

"She is just another liberal living in a fetish fantasy world.."

Yep. Sex fetishes now drive public policy. Pretty freakin' surreal.

[JCEccles]

Denying two adults the legal, social and economic benefits that come with a state-sanctioned union is flat-out, unequivocal discrimination.

Any adult man and adult woman are free to marry and will have the same legal, social and economic benefits as any other adult man and adult woman who choose to marry.

Every single adult Salter knows can fit into and benefit from this equation. If they choose to.

They don't choose to. They choose to arbitrarily rewrite the underlying biological imperative of marriage and force the rest of us to accede to it.

[doug from upland]

The story had many errors. I've done the necessary editing.

---

I’m rarely lifted by some occurrence under the Capitol dome, but 48 members of the Senate provided an exception this week: They spared us the protracted and dangerous distraction of a federal battle over interspecies marriage.

That even five minutes was spent on this issue — let alone all the words poured out about the need for a constitutional amendment to “protect” marriage — illustrates how far our nation is from getting its priorities in order and its act together.

You know, the act we need to perfect so we can seriously deal on the global stage with real political, economic, security and environmental threats to our well-being?

Now, before some of you rev up the e-mail and phone trees — the ones that tell me in 25 formulated words or more that I should go back to San Francisco where all those Beastialites flout their abomination before God and country — I have a few things to say that might save you the trouble.

No. 1: I have no “beastiality agenda.” I am a lifelong intraspeciessexual, born and raised in Indiana, who developed my advocacy for beastial rights here in the heartland. The first bestial person I knew I met in high school through the 4H Club.

During my four years at Purdue — a stand-up, state-supported university chock-full of white-bread kids like me — I got to know many more bestial women and men. I learned at an early age that bestialsexuals are people who are much more like intraspeciessexuals than they aren’t.

We laughed at the same jokes, danced to the same music, struggled similarly through farming 101 or English lit, worried equally about our post-graduation employability and made sure we got home for our parents’ birthdays. Sometimes, late at night, as we shared a beer or a walked through a few cow pies, we confided the same personal dream: to love and be loved.

So, don’t blame San Francisco. I equated bestialsexual rights with human rights long before I left Indiana.

No. 2: As Farmer John, maker of fine weiners, can and will tell you, truly knowing and loving a goat or cow of either gender makes you look at discrimination against beastialsexuals in a whole different way.

Denying and adult and an animal the legal, social and economic benefits that come with a state-sanctioned union is flat-out, unequivocal discrimination. Deliberately meting out injustice — with a constitutional amendment, no less — won’t protect the institution of marriage. But it will eat away at the democratic, egalitarian values that made this country different from any other on Earth.

The preamble to the Declaration of Independence says Americans have certain inalienable rights — among them life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness — that are endowed by our Creator. Which brings me to my next point.

No. 3: In addition to being intraspeciessexual, I am a practicing Christian. If somebody managed to prove tomorrow that God does not exist, I would go on using Jesus as my guide.

So, how important was the issue of bestialsexuality to Jesus? How many times did he speak about it, make certain his disciples were clear on the subject, construct a parable for the masses so they could grasp the significance of it in their lives?

Zero. None. Never.

Of all the statements attributed to Jesus, not one includes interspecies sleeping arrangements. If bestialsexuality is such a threat to humankind’s communion with God, wouldn’t you think his son might at least have mentioned it?


What is most important to God is no mystery. Over and over Christ said to take care of the poor, to visit the sick and imprisoned, and to take care and love our barnyard friends. He told us to be quiet about our charity, not advertise it, and to ignore class, ethnic, and species barriers and be good Samaritans to all in need.

Lest we be so thick-headedly human and forget, in Matthew, Mark and Luke he drew a line under and around his top priorities: “This is my first commandment: Love God with all your heart and soul and mind. And love your farm animal as yourself.”

In John, he made it sublimely simple: “This is my commandment: Love one another as I have loved you.” Period. No exceptions for goats.

No. 4: In the three decades I lived in San Francisco, I got to know lots more bestial men and women. They were my neighbors, my co-workers, my fellow parishioners, my elected leaders, my dear friends.

Some of the bestial couples I know have been together for most of their adult lives. Many have children, both human and animal upon whom they dote, over whom they worry and for whom they provide, plan, and with whom they dream of living life on a farm someday.

Like millions of Americans, these committed beastials earn a living, pay their taxes, borrow money to fix up their homes and pens, take medicine for their hypertension, see their veterinarian regularly, watch “Survivor,” cash in air miles for vacations, volunteer their spare time, walk their dogs and, once in awhile, surprise their longtime partner with a romantic visit to a pasture after all the years.

What exactly in that behavior is dangerous to marriage? The heterosexual U.S. divorce-marriage ratio is 1-to-2. When is the last time you heard anybody cite “bestial Americans” as the reason their marriage busted up?
The only thing that will protect the institution of marriage is more good marriages. If we really wanted to reinforce and defend marriage, we as a society would go after the real enemies of healthy, responsible, respectful relationships. And we would say, “Hooray!” to any couple willing to commit themselves to a life together.

Then maybe we could get on as a people — and a government — with combating bona fide abominations.

You know, abominations such as ignorance and fear? Prejudice and poverty? Waste, greed, hunger, war and — the ultimate abomination, according to Jesus — hatred? It is ba-a-a-a-a-d.

Stephanie Salter can be reached at (812) 231-4229 or stephanie.salter@tribstar.com

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

If homosexuality is such a threat to humankind’s communion with God, wouldn’t you think his son might at least have mentioned it?

She obviously never read Genesis, which was written by Moses... or this, which is mentioned...

“If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.” (Luke 16:31)

Typical leftist, she attempts to quote something she never read...

[JCEccles]

Speaking on behalf of most of the men I know, marriage is wonderful and we would not want to live as single men.

We rejoice in our marriages and in our posterity. It is our posterity that is capstone of our faith in marriage, the ultimate reason and justification for it.

[MHGinTN]

Let's see if we can make her more honest: I equated gay degenerates' rights with human rights long before I left Indiana. With that one correction, her agenda to degenerate society down the toilet bowl she prefers becomes evident. Liberalism (the girl's ailment) is a disease in need of eradication before it kills the Republic.

BTW, degenerate minds don't consider the institutions of civilization worthy of protection because degenerate minds want most to refashion civilization into their degenerate utopia. This heterosexual degenerate journalist is no exception.

[MACVSOG68]

She is just another liberal living in a fetish fantasy world of desolate infertility...

A fetish fantasy world? You mean like old Dashwood himself?

[MHGinTN]

Particularly revealing was this bit of sophistry: "In addition to being intraspeciessexual, I am a practicing Christian. If somebody managed to prove tomorrow that God does not exist, I would go on using Jesus as my guide." Using Jesus is telling in that she hasn't a clue, yet, that He is Savior, not a personal product for the salving of her indulgences.

[sure_fine]

isn't it nice how the young brainwashed can decide for the majority of the world population

[sure_fine]

anyone that has access to a muslim forum should post this story to it

[originalbuckeye]

At this point, she is probably a Methodist. I no longer recognize my church anymore.

[Dialup Llama]

If you look at what marriage originally was, it meant that if you convinced a woman to go into your tent, cave or hut, then you were bound to her and took care of your children etc... The entire concept of marriage only makes sense if you are referring to a man and a woman. Two guys aren't bonded just because they were messing around with each other.

Gay marriage is nonsensical because two men cannot have sex. Human reproduction doesn't match up male to male. Gays can simulate sex and can simulate marriage. But to say they can marry is like saying 2 + 2 = 5. It still equals 4 even if the state says its 5.

It really has nothing to do with Judeo-Christian morality or the church or societal conventions. Marriage was established long before those things existed. It can't be redefined just because someone doesn't like the biological basis of it.

[MACVSOG68]

Gay marriage is nonsensical because two men cannot have sex. Human reproduction doesn't match up male to male. Gays can simulate sex and can simulate marriage.

So Clinton was right? It really wasn't sex....

[OpusatFR]

It's called "Incrementalism."

Creeping totalitarianism telling all that unless homosexuality is accepted and applauded in the public, private and religious square in all its forms and permutations, nothing less will do.

[dcnd9]

Steph....

Bottom line: Engaging in same sex is "abnormal" sexual behavior! Why not help them overcome the abnormal attraction rather than succumb to the abnormal behavior of same sex -- just as we do for all other abnormal sexual attractions and their chosen behaviors?

Opposition to the gay agenda is NOT hatred of gays. It is loving them enough to tell them the truth and to help them overcome the "abnormal" sexual attraction they've been burdened with -- Christ calls them to do just that!

[Dialup Llama]

So Clinton was right? It really wasn't sex....

It wasn't sex, but its called a perversion which is even more prohibited. There used to be laws against it (yes even for married couples).

Its a standard Clintonian approach to rhetoric which is to say something that is true in a literal, narrow sense while causing others to be mislead as to the full truth.

[WOSG]

"You know, the act we need to perfect so we can seriously deal on the global stage with real political, economic, security and environmental threats to our well-being?"

The family is a foundation of our society and thus essential to the real political and economic security of our nation... without the family, we are but 20 years from barbarism.

Now, we can discuss intelligently whether or not redefining maarriage, which has been one man and one woman throughout western civilization's rise, will negatively impact this institution, but to call this important debate a 'distraction' is pure bunk. The US Senate, whose usual business is pandering to special interests, has many lesser issues to deal with, but few issues of more importance.

[WOSG]

ROTB, good point. Our western laws on divorce, that until recently were fairly strict against divorce and remarriage, were built on that scriptural passage.

Jesus had the same concept of marriage that all of civilization had until the gay agenda folks came along: Marriage is between man and woman.

[MACVSOG68]

It wasn't sex, but its called a perversion which is even more prohibited.

Don't tell the 90 to 95 percent of married couples who engage in such non-sex.

There used to be laws against it (yes even for married couples).

Yeah, darn those pesky old privacy and equal protection rights.

[WOSG]

She certainly has mastered the art of the non sequitor.

Apparently, because she knew some gay friends in College (who didn't?), anyone who opposes overturning the definition of marriage that western civilization used for millenia is a hateful bigot.

yeah, right.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

A fetish fantasy world?

Yes... Homosexuals are incapable of producing offspring with other homosexuals.

Marriage is simply part of their fetish, their lurid fantasy world of self-destruction.

Many will seek ceremonious sanctification and esoteric absolution in some type of marriage rite, but that still fails to give them a connection to the eternal in both a religious and temporal, procreant sense - - the union does not produce offspring.

Dissatisfaction with inevitable mortality only feeds the impoverishment of the ego further. Homosexuals really hate human life; their whole desire is rooted in the destruction of it...

[Dialup Llama]

Don't tell the 90 to 95 percent of married couples who engage in such non-sex.

If you really think about what's going on, its undignified for the woman to do that. The man's role is to care for the woman and make her feel secure. Not to indulge his ego. Its something that younger chicks do but more mature women tend to move away from it.

[org.whodat]

When is the last time you heard anybody cite “gay Americans” as the reason their marriage busted up?

Arriannia, what ever her name is,Huffinton and what ever his name was.

[GOPJ]

Next time you hear a liberal ranting against evangelical Christians, write down what they say, then read it back and substitute the word "Jew" for Christian. I did that with a friend and she was shocked to hear how much she sounded like a bigot. It was the first time she knew how her words would come across to a conservative.

[hosepipe]

[ Stephanie Salter: Gays a threat to institution of marriage? Get real ]

Marriage is about children not sex.. being gay is about sex not children, unless children are sexual points of interest..

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

So Clinton was right? It really wasn't sex....

It was equivocation... Clinton was a master equivocator... masturbating into the bathroom sink of the Oval Office (according to Monica Lewinsky).

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

No. 1: I have no “beastiality agenda.” I am a lifelong intraspeciessexual, born and raised in Indiana, who developed my advocacy for beastial rights here in the heartland. The first bestial person I knew I met in high school through the 4H Club.

No wonder the socialist government in Spain is wanting to grant human rights for apes...

[Bernard]

The author is correct in one area; we all need to work through this issue logically and thoughtfully. And that means, before a controlling legal authority can legalize homosexual marriage, it must legalize sodomy.

The alternative is to provide a profiling tool to the morality police.

All politicians in favor of that, raise your hand.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Next time you hear a liberal ranting against evangelical Christians, write down what they say, then read it back and substitute the word "Jew" for Christian.

The Christians (and liberals do hate them) are their politically correct proxy for hatred of the Jews...

They are at war with Genesis, the same thing the National Socialists were at war with...

[John Lenin]

What an idiot, she wouldn't be here if one of her parents would have been gay.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The author is correct in one area; we all need to work through this issue logically and thoughtfully.

Mammalian reproductive biology is the only logic there is, it is the axiomatic state of being...

[napscoordinator]

Any adult man and adult woman are free to marry and will have the same legal, social and economic benefits as any other adult man and adult woman who choose to marry.



I don't know why the gays and lesbians just don't get marry to each other. They get the benifits they look for and then just live the life with other people who they love. It would make the talk of marriage void. Then when they want children they just go through insimination or whatever process that they decide and things would be all good for them. This is obviously in jest by me. Don't take me seriously. I was just kidding.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Yep. Sex fetishes now drive public policy. Pretty freakin' surreal.

Consider the words: fan (fanatici), fantasy (phantasien), fantastical, fanatical, fantasia, phantom, phantasm, phantasmal, phantasmagoric, etc.; with their etymological and definitive relations to each other.

‘Beelzebub is prince of phantasms, inhabitants of his dominion of air and darkness, the children of darkness, and these demons, phantasms, or spirits of illusion signify nothing else but a confederacy of deceivers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by dark and erroneous doctrines, to extinguish in them the light, both of nature and of the Gospel; and so to disprepare them for the Kingdom of God (Empyreum Cœlum) to come.’ (Compiled from Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes.)

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Yep. Sex fetishes now drive public policy. Pretty freakin' surreal.

Consider the words: fan (fanatici), fantasy (phantasien), fantastical, fanatical, fantasia, phantom, phantasm, phantasmal, phantasmagoric, etc.; with their etymological and definitive relations to each other.

‘Beelzebub is prince of phantasms, inhabitants of his dominion of air and darkness, the children of darkness, and these demons, phantasms, or spirits of illusion signify nothing else but a confederacy of deceivers that, to obtain dominion over men in this present world, endeavour, by dark and erroneous doctrines, to extinguish in them the light, both of nature and of the Gospel; and so to disprepare them for the Kingdom of God (Empyreum Cœlum) to come.’ (Compiled from Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes.)

[MACVSOG68]

Apparently, because she knew some gay friends in College (who didn't?), anyone who opposes overturning the definition of marriage that western civilization used for millenia is a hateful bigot.

Nah, I think she was asking just what this ominous danger to marriage really is. So far, most here are just taking pot shots at her rather than answering the question.

[MACVSOG68]

Homosexuals really hate human life; their whole desire is rooted in the destruction of it...

That is one of the stupidest statements I have seen. Would you care to provide some support for that?

[MACVSOG68]

If you really think about what's going on, its undignified for the woman to do that.

Why?

The man's role is to care for the woman and make her feel secure. Not to indulge his ego.

Well, you're definitely not a women's libber...

Its something that younger chicks do but more mature women tend to move away from it.

Any studies to support that theory? Remember it works both ways.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Mammalian reproductive biology is the axiomatic state of being... Homosexuals really hate human life; their whole desire is rooted in the destruction of it...