How to rebut all the moronic arguments against gay people marrying each other

You know what it is? I am pissed off. And tired. And need a good ol’ rant.

This post has nothing to do with research or academia (well actually, with research, yes, but that’s not the point), but I had to get it off my chest. I have been compiling this list in my head for a while and finally decided to post it because, seriously people, get a move on and legalise gay marriage ALREADY. (Australia, I’m talking to YOU). Also, a couple nights ago I happened to watch the Louis Theroux episode where he visits the Westboro Baptist Church and is met by a big fat dumbfounding pile of crazy, so I remembered that I had this huge bone to pick with the bigoted fascists of the world and thought this was a good a time as any.
So this post is for when you voice your informed, compassionate, libertarian gay marriage-friendly opinion at a party and there’s that moron (there’s always one) that decides to argue with you–first of all, ask yourself what kind of people you are surrounding yourself with. Time to make new friends, like, yesterday–you can respond as follows.

I have tried to list the arguments in order of increasing idiocy.

(NOTE: This is a long post. If you don’t want to read the whole thing, just read the parts in bold. That’s pretty much the gist of it).

Moronic argument #1: Gays shouldn’t be  allowed to marry [or exist] because if everyone was gay, humans would become extinct. 

No rebuttal. That is completely correct. The logic of this argument is flawless, much like if everyone was blonde, brunettes would become extinct. However, the likelihood of everyone in the world being, or turning gay at the same time is about the same as 60 Minutes making actual investigative journalism: Null. This may come as a surprise, but people are just born what they are, gay people are not made by  married gay people. (Trust me on this). Sleep tight, ’cause if human extinction is your biggest worry, you are safe and snug as a bug.

Moronic argument #2Gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry because that would threaten the institution of marriage.

How?? First of all, you know chicken shit about what kind of institution marriage is. Marriage has always been a contract designed to ensure the origin of a man’s offspring, and thus the lawful transmission of title, property, name, and so on. Daughters were practically sold to the highest, or most convenient bidder. For the woman, it simply meant financial and societal protection.

The registration of marriages by a legal OR religious authority – let’s point out, here, that religious ratification is just ONE option – is about 500 years old, and marriage based on love is a quaint novelty about two centuries old. Nowadays, people can be married (legally) in Vegas by some old dude dressed as Elvis. They can marry their childrensiblingsthe Eiffel Tower, or their pets. They can get married in front of half of the world’s media, and be divorced less than a year later. And there’s that nagging statistic of one in every three marriages ending in divorce anyway. Basically: people have very different ideas about what marriage is and what they want out of it. In any case, it has no impact whatsoever on other people’s marriages. If you’re one of those people with a happy, white, middle-class, saint marriage – well, is it so flimsy that just the notion of two consenting adults of the same sex getting married risks to destroy it? If so, you have a bigger problem than a couple of queens tying the knot, methinks.

Moronic argument #3: Gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry because that would threaten the family/ because what about the children????

Sure, because you have people who love each other, want to live together, commit and support each other, who want to have children and have Chrismukkah dinners and summer vacations and first days of school and nights at the table doing homework and recitals and football games. Poor children!! I MEAN, VOM, RIGHT? This stuff is NASTY.

If you’re worried about children from gay families growing up in a malicious environment, being bullied and whatnot, well, what about YOU don’t behave maliciously to begin with? Children will learn from the adults around them, they’re not born homophobic. Also, you’ll find that children’s resilience is a lot higher than adults expect, and that adult attitudes toward childhood are generally reflective of adults’ own hangups rather than children’s actual ability to withstand and understand social situations.

Moronic argument #4: Gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry [or exist] because homosexuality is a sin, you’ll burn in hell forever if you don’t stop and every time a penis touches an asshole an angel loses its wings.

Firstly, I would like to express my gratitude for your fervent, if not a bit creepy, concern with the state of my soul. So, according to your religion, being gay is wrong. Noted. However, if you don’t mind I’ll take this issue up with the Lord myself, when the time comes. And, as you are so sure that gays are undoubtedly going to be punished, then what’s with the need to manifest, picket, and generally troll around about it? Hasn’t it basically been already taken care of?

Also, and just because I like precision, I would like to point out that Jesus Christ never said a word about gays being bad. There are Paul’s letters, sure. And there is that bit in Leviticus. But there are several versions and translations of versions of the Bible and the text is hardly plain to understand. Also, if you do want to understand it plainly, how come you are so righteous about those two pages of the Bible and you happily forget everything else? Leviticus in the same place also condemns wearing clothes made of two different types of fabric, having sex with a woman when she has her period–are you proposing we do the same? [If they say yes, nod and STEP AWAY IMMEDIATELY].

Moronic argument # 5: Gays shouldn’t be allowed to marry [o exist] because homosexuality is not normal/because Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve (or similar theme variations).

Firstly: If you mean not normal as in unnatural, you’re wrong. Homosexual activity has been found in over 1500 animal species and extensively documented in at least 500 of them, including swans, penguins, monkeys, dolphins, hyenas, elephants, giraffes, dragonflies and bedbugs. It has also been common in human societies since the beginning of recorded history, in ancient Greece, Egypt, the Americas, Asia and the Middle East.

Perhaps you meant not normal as not the norm, or, “the majority of people is straight, why should I bother about a few individuals with a penchant for glitter?” Well, this argument doesn’t hold either, because the fact that something is infrequent doesn’t make it wrong. Case in point: left-handed people; gingers; albinos; people with eyes of different colours; people with an IQ of 140; people who can curl their tongues. Psychopathic serial killers are also infrequent, but that fact alone doesn’t make it wrong either. It’s the killing people part.

Could it be that you’re just UNCOMFORTABLE??

Seriously, though. Most of these “arguments” simply come from the unquestionable fact that some people find the idea of gay sex revolting. Look, duckies, don’t take it personally. It’s their prerogative. I’m sure if you think about it long enough you’ll be able to think of at least ONE sexual practice that makes you go “eeeeeewwwwww”. (Like golden showers, for example). So, to each their own. In this case, just reassure them that once married, all the dirty, sweaty, rowdy gay sex becomes tame, vanilla, PG-13 sex, just like for the heteros.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s