This response by the Family Research Council about the APA decision to back gay marriage, is, by any standard, pretty tepid stuff, and most certainly when compared to some of the things they say:
“The theory that being denied the right to ‘marry’ same-sex partners damages the mental health of homosexuals and the children they raise is a convenient one–but unsupported by research,” Sprigg said.
Sprigg continued, “The mental health benefits of marriage result from the natural union of a man and a woman, not from the granting of government benefits upon any household that demands them.”
At any rate, not much there, but this wording from the newspaper itself is kind of weird:
Throughout its history, APA has taken a progressive stance toward homosexuality. In 1973, APA removed homosexuality from their list of mental disorders, and in 2000, the organization publicly supported same-sex civil unions.
I guess not recognizing something as a disorder is considered progressive.
At any rate, not hing much there, lest I hastily be accused of Christian bashing. I just thought that phraseology was weird. Not as awkward as some of the stuff I write, by any stretch of the imagination, but weird nonetheless.
Kimmitt
“The theory that being denied the right to ‘marry’ same-sex partners damages the mental health of homosexuals and the children they raise is a convenient one–but unsupported by research,” Sprigg said.
Meh, so was the fact that “separate but equal” inherently wasn’t, but the Court accepted it because it was patently obvious to anyone who wasn’t a bigot.
Jon
Hey John, for your newer readers like myself, do you think you could name off a few politicians, political writers, ect, that you mostly agree with? Because reading your blog is like reading Atrios only with “what’s wrong with my party?” thrown on at the end of a lot of posts. It’s a bit confusing.
..I guess that’s the long way of asking you, “why are you a republican?”
John Cole
Jon- Heh.
I sometimes don’t know if I am a Republican anymore, either. I certainly liked a helluva lot of people in my party a lot more when we were in the minority than I do now. Maybe I still stick to the notion that the Republicans believe what they said they believed rather than what it is turning out to be.
If I had to construct a short list of politicans I respect, they would be:
Tim Penny,
John Kasich, Pat Moynihan, Warren Rudman, Phil Graham, Bob Barr, Alan Simpson.
Shit- they are all retired.
Senators I generally like:
Evan Bayh
Norm Coleman
Susan Collins
Pete Domenici
Mitch McConnell
Lindsey Graham
Chuck Grassley
Chuck Hagel
Joe Lieberman
Arlen Specter
Richard Lugar
George Voinovich
John Warner
I have to admit Joe Biden comes across well.
It is unfair for me to say I really have a personal distaste for many of them, because many of them, as people, seem quite pleasant. Even Santorum seems like a pleasant enough person. I just hate the dogmatism and the absolutism and the theocratic impulses.
And really, that is the crux of the issue. Many of the Republicans aren;t that bad, it is just recently they have lurched hard right on everything except for all the things they told me they believed in- fiscal responsibility, smaller government, etc.
People I like to read and generally agree with- I like George Will, Charles Krauthammer, Hitchens, O’Rourke.
A weird group of people. IN general, I am all over the map issue wise, so I get pissed off from time to time and it isn;t really fair to say I like one writer and hate another. Only Justin Raimondo goes in the permanent hate category.
At any rate, as I am all over he map, it is easy to not look like I have any core beliefs. I do, and one of them is that right now my side of the damned aisle is out of control. You caught me in the middle of a three month period where my party appears to just shitting the bed on everything that matters to me, so I really do sound like Atrios or the Daily kos.
And, to make maters worse, I change my mind. IF someone gives me reasonable and persuasive and valid arguments, I will change my mind. So even this website does not scan from 2001 until now on some issues.
An example- I have gone from thinking civil unions were an ok alternative and gay marriage was unecessary to pretty much the position that I don’t understand why it shouldn’t be allowed. That is a pretty radical shift, and it only happened over the course of the last year and a half.
Most of all, though, my problem is I hate bullshit and excesses, so I have been railing against my party and the apologists in the press and the blogosphere, launching some pretty pointed attacks when I think people are just making shit up out of sheer partisanship. Like, for example, this nonsense about the press being overtly anti-military and the NEwsweek bit.
I also don;t like outright unfairness- shit just shouldn’t be certain ways, no matter what your party says. That is why the bankruptcy bill stuck in my craw so bad. Or the mean-spiritedness towards homosexuals. Or the idiocy about Democrats being against faith. Or the divisiveness and nastiness and inyuor face attitude of the “Our God Uber Alles” fundies.
And I would also be remiss if I did not point out that I launched some pretty partisan attacks myself against Democrats, and most likely will in the future. I can;t stand the partisan MoveOn thugs and the International Answer apologists.
It’s just right now I am going through a bitter and disillusioned phase with my party, so it seems like I am Oliver Willis with a Republican party membership.
Bear with me. I am a work in progress.
Sorry if that has just made things worse, but I don’t know how else to phrase it.
Oh, and most of all- I think I am right. All the time. But I am willing to admit it when I recognize I am full of shit.
ouchi01
I personally think both parteis are totally a waste of time. They both pander for votes and do whatever the hell pleases marginal groups once they’re in office.
I’d be for a party that would:
Deploy the military when necessary only.
Not be craven media whores.
Not pander to morons to build phony coalitions.
Push accountable and funded education reforms.
Make science and tech a high priority (including stem cell research.)
Implement sensible immigration policy.
On the same – sex marriage debate, I don’t see why gays can’t marry personally. If people want to be married, obviously they want to stay with each other. I don’t think this really rips society up as much as the partisan idiocy on the issue.
It’s really puzzling how there are these 2 teams that pander this shopworn crap to people of basically equivalent low-functioning intellect, and yet everyone is in a hurry to defend it.
Kimmitt
Not pander to morons to build phony coalitions.
Man I hope this isn’t a dealbreaker, because, well, we’re all morons at least some of the time.
bago
Wait, you enjoy PJ O’Rourke, this must mean you like irony, like some leftist dadaist who loves the destruction of the fabric of our culture, or something.
Really though, unless you can take a concept and play with the reduction ad absurdum and enjoy ideas at their proper level you will never get it, and find yourself co-erced int o increasingly strange things.
The bullshit filter is a good thing.
bago
Assume that reduction is a reductio, and the grammar police will be sated.