Gohmert: Pro-Gay ‘Marriage’ Judges ‘Need Some Basic Plumbing Lessons’

Liberal federal judges who have ruled against state laws barring same-sex “marriages,” essentially arguing that there is no biological evidence to support the idea of marriage between a man and a woman, “need some basic plumbing lessons,” said Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), himself a former state district judge for Texas’s 7^th judicial district and chief justice of Texas’s 12^th Court of Appeals. […]

In the Oklahoma case on Jan. 14, U.S. District Judge Terence C. Kern ruled that “Oklahoma’s constitutional amendment limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples violates the Equal Protection Clause of the 14^th Amendment.” (Kern was nominated to his post in 1994 by President Bill Clinton.) The ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby on Dec. 20 in Utah followed the same lines. …

god help us if that meteor hits and we have to build a space Noah’s Ark....guess what kind of a couple are going to get on the ship first to save the human race..... sounds like a bad comedy movie

So THAT'S what happened to the unicorns...

Gay marriage is just one of the many assaults on traditional values. Personally I think those values are the glue that holds our (or any other) society together.

When enough of the glue has been destroyed, it is quite possible, IMO, that the society will suddenly and dramatically self-destruct.

I hope you’re right, that our society is infinitely malleable, and that activists can adjust it to suit their whims without drastic negative consequences.

But I doubt it. Are you familiar with “critical theory?” Whether they realize it or not, CT is behind all modern attacks on traditional values by progressives.

But CT does not have a goal or a state towards which it works and is then satisfied that eutopia has been reached.

When is achieves goal A, there isn’t even a pause before expressing outrage at situation B, and so forth. IOW, they will NEVER be happy. Institutions and practices are ALL to be destroyed. An implacable enemy cannot be appeased, he can only be fought and defeated. Or you can lose the battle and be destroyed yourself.

IMO, most American think we can still give in on gay marriage or whatever the issue du jour is and they’ll be satisfied and leave us alone. But that’s not an option. They’re like the Bond villain when asked if he expects Bond to talk. “No, Mr. Bond, I expect you to die.”

Your mileage, of course, may vary, and I respect people with honest but different opinions. I do not, however, respect the critical theorists, who are, I believe, the most deadly enemies of humanity.

Quickly, regarding the critique of CT, whether progressives have end goals, etc...

Can we honestly say that any ideology is ever satisfied? Are you ever satisfied? Was there ever a utopian time where everything was as it should be? Every cause moves from one cause to another, towards whatever they think is the ideal. There are those within the Libertarian movement far more zealous than I who would essentially abolish nearly all forms of government, which I don’t agree with. So as one piece is defunded or dismantled or weakened, they are quickly moving on to the next, in pursuit of their ideal. This is the tension that exists between ideologies. Both sides ultimately see the other as seeking to destroy.

I think you severely understand the ideas and motivations behind Critical Theory. It is not just another ideology with goals. It is the negation of ideology, a desire to destroy all that exists. Nihilism.

Are you ever satisfied?

No, but I can envision a world in which all are treated equally and have a fair right to compete to get ahead. That would satisfy me, though of course in reality such a condition will never be achieved.

CT, by definition, cannot envision a world that would satisfy it. It is solely an oppositional movement. Its goal is to destroy, not caring what replaces the institution brought down.

And in your opinion the Progressive movement is nihilistic?

For me, I can’t envision a perfect system, a perfect ideology, because humans are messy. Emotions and wants and animal instincts are messy and we’re a messy race. So I think both sides of the equation are going to be continually battling it out, with some convinced the other side is only concerned with destruction. I know Progressives who think that of Conservatism/LIbertarianism/etc. As such, and because my line of work has me in the midst of many progressives, I see that they aren’t bent on nihilistic destruction. They just have some different values, different world views, and different solutions. In all my years, I’ve never encountered anyone hell bent on perpetual destruction. Only a few anarchists who were really just acting out, honestly. From what I can see, in the same way that you can envision a world where everyone is treated equally and have a fair right to compete to get ahead, so do many others who call themselves Progressives. Oftentimes the ideal vision isn’t what differs, but agreement on how that occurs. Personally, I’m more interested in the commonalities than the differences. Seems more in line with the Christian teachings I admire.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.