Have you heard? Gays are disease-riddled and pushing for polygamy

So goes the unsupportable yet unrelenting refrain, this time in New Hampshire, where a few Republicans, with their newly won majority in the state House of Representatives, are wasting no time in reaffirming that opponents of same-sex marriage — passed into law in the Granite State in 2009 and now under fresh assault — are preternaturally immune to coherent or reasoned thought. I’m guessing that the three idiots quoted here really do think that they are making utterances that are both original and of grave importance, even if a part of each of them surely if only dimly realizes that the facts dictate otherwise.

First there’s Rep. Alfred Baldasaro: “The same thing happened in Canada, where they passed gay marriage. Now they’re fighting in the courts to get 3 husbands, 3 wives.” Well, Al, “they” passed straight marriage in the United States a long time ago, and now about half of married couples wind up fighting in the courts to dissolve the resulting arrangements, and “they” are also fighting in the courts to make teaching evolution illegal and criminalize the termination of pregnancies stemming from incest or rape. Cause and effect, right? But anyway, why not wait until gays — or for that matter, straights — start agitating for polygamy before worrying about the threat of polygamy, okay?

Then there’s Rep. Fenton “Audible” Groen: “[Homosexuality] will significantly increase their risk of serious diseases and can be expected to significantly shorten their lives.” Let’s pretend that this bears the slightest relationship to reality and expand on the concept a little. Married straight people who smoke, drink alcohol to excess, eat too much, or fail to use sunscreen unquestionably increase their risk of serious diseases and can be expected in many cases to significantly shorten their lives. By Groen’s implicit reasoning, they shouldn’t be allowed to remain married.

Finally there’s Howard Kaufmann: “A future redefinition of marriage that permits polygamy would facilitate the introduction an aspect of Sharia or Islamic law that permits a man to have up to four wives.” This is similar to Baldasaro’s beef, but with the added charm of invoking the term “Sharia law,” which has become a facile surrogate for references to Nazis in 21st-century polemics by melonheads. Again, though, if there’s some kind of obligatory link between same-sex marriage and polygamy, none of the thousands of embittered Chicken Littles railing about it has been able to expose it.

Lest you think that this triad of doomsday dimwits is merely pandering to the wants of the electorate, realize that they don’t even have that excuse, although it’s doubtful they know this any more than they seem attuned to other facets of reality. As it happens, according to a recent poll of New Hampshirites, only 17 percent of state residents will be at all upset if same-sex marriage isn’t repealed and only 5 percent will be really upset.

More on the House hearing here, and if you can stomach the woodchuck accents as well as the crap set free using same, watch the video below. It’s heartening to see the stony-voiced gasbags peppered with snickers and derision, and the songstress at the end provides a strange but somehow fitting coda.

Advertisements
  1. #1 by Warren on February 24, 2011 - 6:03 pm

    Ooooo. Scary people dressed in red!

    I wonder what arguments were presented when the Mormons were actively practicing polygyny.

  2. #2 by kemibe on February 24, 2011 - 6:09 pm

    “I wonder what arguments were presented when the Mormons were actively practicing polygyny.”

    “Next things you know people will be angling to marry inanimate objects like rocks, trees and gay homosexers!”

    • #3 by jim on February 26, 2011 - 8:50 am

      Well, I don’t know about you, but at the very least I can expect a more intelligent reply to my queries from an inanimate object than I can from one of these clowns. Consequently, I’d rather marry a rock or a tree than one of them.

%d bloggers like this: