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

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?

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?

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

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.