Evidently, the National Organization Against Marriage has grabbed a fresh face for their latest ad: Miss California!
These anti-marriage groups are good; they know that if they get someone as hot as Miss California to represent them, then you, as one of the masses, will flock to their cause. Good advertising skills.
What I do not understand is why these Christian organizations will spend millions of dollars ($1.5 million for the latest run of advertisements) to "protect" the "sanctity" of marriage instead of spending that money on other causes such as fighting poverty, illness, etc. I find it hypocritical to what Christianity is about.
Secondly, they frame Miss California's loss to Miss North Carolina (Go NC!) as if this question decided her fate. Even if this question was the deciding factor, it is not what her response was that jeopardized her victory, but how she responded. "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage." Opposite marriage?? So much for poise and grace. I mean, granted I would not expect too much because this is not necessarily a presidential debate, but when speaking, you should at least be able to present your opinion in a manner that comes off intelligently, especially when you are going to represent Americans around the world.
Thirdly, the only opposition to same-sex marriage that opponents have is based on religious values. I mean, why do you not see the National Organization Against Divorce trying to outlaw divorce or the National Organization Against Premarital Sex trying to criminalize premarital sex. The Bible also condemns these things, and they could be framed as harmful to the "sanctity" of marriage. However, you do not see these organizations because 1) Christians understand that they live in a society in which their religious beliefs should not impede upon other citizen's rights and 2) Christian leaders would have a hard time gaining support and more followers if they were to preach and advocate so strongly against these things because so many Christians engage in these things.
This is not to say that I disapprove of them, but my argument is why would they choose to focus on this issue and not the others, that are equally prohibited/argued against in the Bible. The reason is because they know they can scapegoat out one group of people that you know, ALL Christians hate: the gays! They know that this is one issue that they can still highlight and create in conservative Christians the idea of a common public enemy so that more and more Christians will donate money to their cause and therefore keep them in the positions of power that they hold.
It is easy to marginalize gay people as the enemy because hey, even if you are not a devout Christian, you can still agree that the idea is nasty huh? These campaigns are ridiculous, and they must stop. Start focusing on bigger and better issues rather than ones that give Christianity and other Christians a bad name. Miss California did not lose because she was against same-sex marriage, she lost because she lacked the ability to express her argument and stance thoroughly and intellectually.
And that is the spilt perfume.
These anti-marriage groups are good; they know that if they get someone as hot as Miss California to represent them, then you, as one of the masses, will flock to their cause. Good advertising skills.
What I do not understand is why these Christian organizations will spend millions of dollars ($1.5 million for the latest run of advertisements) to "protect" the "sanctity" of marriage instead of spending that money on other causes such as fighting poverty, illness, etc. I find it hypocritical to what Christianity is about.
Secondly, they frame Miss California's loss to Miss North Carolina (Go NC!) as if this question decided her fate. Even if this question was the deciding factor, it is not what her response was that jeopardized her victory, but how she responded. "We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage." Opposite marriage?? So much for poise and grace. I mean, granted I would not expect too much because this is not necessarily a presidential debate, but when speaking, you should at least be able to present your opinion in a manner that comes off intelligently, especially when you are going to represent Americans around the world.
Thirdly, the only opposition to same-sex marriage that opponents have is based on religious values. I mean, why do you not see the National Organization Against Divorce trying to outlaw divorce or the National Organization Against Premarital Sex trying to criminalize premarital sex. The Bible also condemns these things, and they could be framed as harmful to the "sanctity" of marriage. However, you do not see these organizations because 1) Christians understand that they live in a society in which their religious beliefs should not impede upon other citizen's rights and 2) Christian leaders would have a hard time gaining support and more followers if they were to preach and advocate so strongly against these things because so many Christians engage in these things.
This is not to say that I disapprove of them, but my argument is why would they choose to focus on this issue and not the others, that are equally prohibited/argued against in the Bible. The reason is because they know they can scapegoat out one group of people that you know, ALL Christians hate: the gays! They know that this is one issue that they can still highlight and create in conservative Christians the idea of a common public enemy so that more and more Christians will donate money to their cause and therefore keep them in the positions of power that they hold.
It is easy to marginalize gay people as the enemy because hey, even if you are not a devout Christian, you can still agree that the idea is nasty huh? These campaigns are ridiculous, and they must stop. Start focusing on bigger and better issues rather than ones that give Christianity and other Christians a bad name. Miss California did not lose because she was against same-sex marriage, she lost because she lacked the ability to express her argument and stance thoroughly and intellectually.
And that is the spilt perfume.
