Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

CWA Woman Compares Ellen To Polygamist Sect


Wendy Wright of Concerned Women For America appeared on CNN last night to decry Ellen DeGeneres and Portia de Rossi’s forthcoming gay marriage. And, like so many before her, Wright relied on the polygamist argument, but took it one step further by invoking the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saint sect down in Texas:

We need to look at the consequences of that and we can look at the polygamy community in Texas. There are consequences.

When you redefine marriage to mean anything it can mean nothing. Once you start breaking down and claim that marriage can be something other than between one man and one woman, you do open the doors to it being anything.

PR king Howard Bragman, who will soon marry his long-time lover, had loads to say on the matter, of course. Unfortunately Wright doesn’t have the brain power to keep her argument afloat.

By:           Andrew Belonksy
On:           May 20, 2008
Tagged: , , , ,
  • 19 Comments
    • Tweety
      Tweety

      “Latter” as in “near or comparatively near the end” not “Ladder” as in “a means of rising.” Children, listen here! This is why you need a high school education.

      May 20, 2008 at 11:20 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Tegucigalpa Todd
      Tegucigalpa Todd

      Awww, I would love to see Howard take on someone who can keep up with him. Confronting this pin-headed, brain-dead shill is like pitting Dakota Fanning against Joan Collins.

      Put Howard up against someone who can make the fight interesting.

      May 20, 2008 at 12:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Bitch Republic
      Bitch Republic

      Yah, it drives me a little bonkers when Andrew refers to them as “Ladder” Day Saints, instead of “Latter.”

      http://www.BitchRepublic.net

      May 20, 2008 at 12:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      Actually Howard was way too easy on her.

      1. She’s allowing divorce, so what it means is one man/one woman at a time.

      2. What was the name of the Church in New Jersey that was sued and what were the circumstances? To allow her to toss that out without details and without challenge is a big slip by him and the host.

      3. As most folks who read my posts know, I work in the welfare area – what consequences do folks having tons of kids they can’t take care of by people they are never married to and often have multiple partners have on society?

      That issue really needs to be raised when people say we can’t afford governments and companies to pay for same sex partner’s insurance etc. So, if that is the case, then married couples should be limited to one or two kids? Last I heard kids were expensive to add to insurance, to say nothing of public schooling costs etc.

      4. Wendy kept referencing people being “forced to do things contrary to what they know to be right.” Again, this was unchallenged. I think she meant “contrary to our right wing No Catholics or Orthodox allowed view of Christianity.”

      Americans United for Separation of Church and State has a number of great books by Robert Boston and he has studied or quoted those who study right wing organizations. It is fascinating to me that homosexuality is mentioned thousands of times in a computer search of their documents but divorce and child support hardly at all. I don’t recall if this was a search of FOF, CWA or another group, but my factoid definitely refers to one of the very large groups. I just can’t remember which one.

      Could say lots more, but this post is long enough.

      May 20, 2008 at 12:44 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • beefy
      beefy

      this lady looks like ann heche’s whiny bitch sister.

      May 20, 2008 at 1:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CitizenGeek
      CitizenGeek

      Jaroslaw makes very good points! I think he should have been on CNN instead of Howard!

      May 20, 2008 at 1:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • todd
      todd

      She’s a MAN, Baby!!!!!!!

      May 20, 2008 at 1:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      There isn’t too much available to keep that arguement afloat. But that brings up an issue.
      Should we go for bigamous gay marriages as long as thier isn’t any harmful intermarriage?
      Why not.?

      May 20, 2008 at 2:29 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • foofyjim
      foofyjim

      There is no such thing as gay marriage. There is no such thing as straight marriage. These phrases have been invented to divide us. There is only marriage.

      Marriage is a contract between two people who agree to share their lives together and intermingle their assets. The contract protects the individuals and their offspring. Current law discriminates against same sex couples. We are not trying to “redefine” marriage. We simply want equal access to the same binding contract.

      May 20, 2008 at 2:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lessthan
      Lessthan

      I really wish that the news shows would allow for longer debates. There was barely any time for a good arguement to start. It would have been great to have had Howard put her in her place.

      May 20, 2008 at 2:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • M Shane
      M Shane

      i think that the “Ladder” as for climbinhg upward is a gag. Don’t lose your sense of humor.

      May 20, 2008 at 2:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • key
      key

      Are there any women on Faux News over the age of 35?

      May 20, 2008 at 2:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Geek-ish
      Geek-ish

      My eye literally began to twitch while watching this “concerned” woman. That hasn’t happened since junior high algebra class.

      May 20, 2008 at 8:34 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • June23
      June23

      “What possible harm can … Mr. Sulu possibly cause here?”

      I’m putting that on a T-shirt.

      May 20, 2008 at 8:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Miss Understood
      Miss Understood

      It’s against my moral beliefs to allow Wendy Wright to breathe oxygen.

      May 20, 2008 at 11:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kurt&Jeff
      Kurt&Jeff

      Can you say “Stepford”?

      May 20, 2008 at 11:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • heathen
      heathen

      Traditional marriage is long-gone and these people are further destroying it by offering gay people the right to a sham-marriage(one with the opposite sex and for cynical reasons) and denying them the right to a real marriage (one with the person they love and want to commit to.)
      Straight people against gay marriage need to look in the mirror and at the statistics. They have been destroying marriage as we’ve always known it for many years. The time is ripe for gay people to show them that the institution is not to be taken for granted.

      May 21, 2008 at 8:10 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      Thanks Citizen Geek for the kind remarks. I did a little digging – I have never found anything so obscure this easily about the New Jersey Church referenced above. But what I found is all old, but still very useful:

      1. This lawsuit about same sex unions is not against “a church” per se but it involves some (United Methodist) church-owned property on the Boardwalk in New Jersey. Not all the property which includes a camp, but the Pavilion which is rented out.

      2. Articles conflict so I can’t be sure – one quoted the UMC saying the property was always used for church functions; another says civil unions & marriages, presumably heterosexual, were permitted to all faiths.

      3. A state of New Jersey spokeswoman was quoted as saying the tax breaks were given specifically for areas opened up to “public use” which is why the UMC’s tax exempt status was revoked for the above named Pavilion.

      4. This information is all from Aug – Sept. 2007, couldn’t find anything newer. Perhaps it is all under appeal and counter appeal in the courts.

      But, shocking as it may seem, I would say Wendy of the Concerned Women of America was deliberately misleading when she said a “Church” was sued. She made it sound as if no religion was safe from government interference and it was nothing of the sort.

      Even if the tax exemption wasn’t the issue, the Methodist church would have lost IF they did in fact rent out the Pavilion to other groups and faiths and then denied the same sex couple.

      May 25, 2008 at 11:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Jaroslaw
      Jaroslaw

      It is late – my last paragraph should have read “even if the the Methodist Church was claiming the right to discriminate based on freedom of religion, this claim would not be valid if in point of fact the facility was opened to other groups of various faiths.

      May 25, 2008 at 11:24 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • QUEERTY DAILY

     


    POPULAR ON QUEERTY


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.