Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.
Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.
(Orson Scott Card, Mormon Times, July 24, 2008)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
elfs
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 04:23 am (UTC)You voiced an opinion. You're entitled to it; however, it's at least somewhat at variance with the available facts.
*sigh* I kept beating this drum through the efforts to impeach both Clinton and Junior. As a man who grew up about 15 miles (and almost 200 years) from where I did once said, "Be always sure you're right–then go ahead." (Davy Crockett, 1834.) They tried to impeach Clinton for sex, when they should have impeached him for lying and giving our secrets to the Chinese. Everybody kept saying "Bad Bush, Bad Bush" and blaming him for Florida in 2000, when they should have (and theoretically still could) impeach him for lying to us about WMD's and torture. Now everybody wants to string Card up for treason; it's not treason, it's inciting a riot on both sides.
Get it right, people. This is why you fail.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 10:50 am (UTC)At no point does he say 'I'm not a homophobic bigot with minimal knowledge of biology and history, but other people who are may think..' - it's all me me me, we we we - there is a total assumption that the reader agrees with him and his world view.
My favourite bit is "Marriage['s] meaning is universal: It is the permanent or semipermanent bond between a man and a woman" (my emphasis). Talk about redefining marriage...
no subject
Date: 2008-08-21 05:49 pm (UTC)I wasn't responding to the original article, but to Elf's post; If the section quoted was quoted out of context, and you knew it was quoted out of context, then you should have said it in you response to Elf; I would have responded much differently to that...but I suppose that would have defeated the purpose of you hiding behind the door with your water balloon.
Either way, I am not your target, so "Get it right...THIS is how YOU fail.
Also: I am not in any way trying to "string Card up" for anything - I can, however, recognize an authentic voice when I hear it, and I said so. The rest of it is your own...product
This, too, is how you fail.