A Republican's social experiment
The run up to the Assembly passage of a resolution calling for an amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution to please the terrified "I see gay people" crowd has begun with Camille Q. Solberg's editorial trying to make the case for passage of the Defense of Marriage Constitutional Amendment.
In it she says the amendment will provide the very best legal protection currently available for traditional one-man/one-woman marriage. Protection from what? The lesbian couple that had the first same-sex marriage last year? They've been together for about 50 years. That's longer than all three of Senator Zien's marriages combined.
All of the reasons listed by her group, the Wisconsin Coalition for Traditional Marriage, on their website for why we need this amendment are ridiculous. However, one jumped out at me as even more ridiculous than some of the others. They state:
Homosexual “marriage” is a vast, untested social experiment with children. No society, at any time, has ever raised a generation of children in homosexual families. In this instance, children are allowed to become the subject of sociological experiments for the sake of adult sexual desires.
Now, a lot of children have been created by heterosexuals for the sake of adult sexual desire. Children are born out of wedlock, or create a wedlock that shouldn't be formed, more often than most people want to believe. And before you toss it off as an inner-city Milwaukee problem, you should check out Milwaukee World's blog about a Republican leggie who is sponsoring this amendment. He doesn't support his traditional marriage anymore (he is recently divorced) and it appears he may have fathered a child out of wedlock.
So this will be a social experiment for that kid right? Good thing she/he will have good company with the millions of kids of that are part of a grand social experiment we heterosexuals call divorce. They meet regularly with the kids of one-night stands, failed birth control and extra marital affairs. They meet regularly because they are everywhere.
And Camille, don't kid yourself. Society has had children raised in homosexual families. Families just need to look closer at old family photos. The really old ones. All of the instances of someone's mom's 'friend' that is in way too many photos and no one talks about and the 'Uncle Joes' that no one knows much about have been helping raise kids for generations. And they turned out just fine thank-you.


2 Comments:
Carrie,
Thank you for this excellent post. I have to say, most of what the supporters of the amendment say makes me sad and angry, but I always chuckle when they call it a “social experiment.” You say it perfectly here.
I noticed you call the proposed amendment the “Defense of Marriage Constitutional Amendment.” This is the language people like Camille Q. Solberg and other supporters of the ban are using. The truth is, this amendment isn’t about “defending marriage” like our opponents want us to think.
Yes, this is about marriage, but it is about much more. It’s also about civil unions. And domestic partnerships. It’s about protections gay and lesbian couples have already secured for themselves possibly being taken away. It’s important that we bring this to the attention of Wisconsinites, and so we’re referring to the amendment as the “constitutional ban on civil unions and marriage.”
Thanks again for the great post and for your attention to the issue.
You are right. I should know better than to use the language from the other side of the argument.
I'll do better in the future as I intend to follow this debate as it progresses.
Post a Comment
<< Home