Monday, November 26, 2012

The Opus Deist on NOM's Board Speaks

Luis Tellez is an Opus Dei numerary which means that he is a celibate lay person who donates the bulk of his income to the order. Mr. Tellez, in addition to being the President of the Witherspoon Institute, is on the board of National Organization for Marriage.

In Witherspoon's organ, Public Discourse, Mr. Tellez wrote an article titled The Future of Marriage: Why "The Inevitable" Is Not Inevitable. Therein, after bemoaning the "drubbing" that he/they took on election day, he claims:

Many friends have said that same-sex marriage is inevitable. It is not. I have confidence that fence-sitters will enter the fray in support of traditional marriage.
It is clear that Mr. Tellez is wed to to the belief that equal marriage and traditional marriage are somehow mutually exclusive. This in spite of the experience in Massachusetts, other US states and the entire country of Spain. The notion that equal marriage has any effect on marriage equality is absurd. Nevertheless, Tellez continues:
As we continue to debate this issue, three important forces can shift the outcome in favor of marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Consider first, public opinion; second, the methods and the message of LGBT activists; and third, reality.
You can read Tellez' nonsense, in its entirety, for yourself. Most of it is wishful thinking refined through selective observation. Mr. Tellez rehashes Frank Schubert's failed talking points (or did Schubert rehash Tellez?). However, there is one bit of homophobic bigotry that I  want to respond to directly. Mr. Tellez asserts that the public doesn't understand gay people. If only the people knew just how unstable and perverted homosexuals really are ...
Social science research shows us, and a growing body of journalistic reporting reveals, that gay men are not interested in permanent monogamous relationships ... Will the provision of marriage cause gay and lesbian Americans to enter lasting and stable relationships en masse? Unlikely.
Essentially, this prick is saying that we are too unstable to allow us to marry. If the people knew "the truth" they would vote against our rights. The "social science research" that he refers to is, of course, the thoroughly rebuked Regnerus "study" which, by the way, does not say that. Intellectual mediocrity aside, there is nothing in Regnerus that could lead anyone to that conclusion. Tellez also relies on Dan Savage who has said that some people need more than one partner. Mr. Savage is a nationally syndicated sex-advice columnist. Dan is neither a scholar nor a spokesman for the LGBT community. His opinion is that some gay and some straight people need more than one partner. At the risk of over-simplifying Dan, he believes that marital fidelity is a myth. So what? What does any of that have to do with marriage equality?

Dan Savage? Seriously?

Tellez comes to a shuddering thud with an echo of irrelevance when we stop testing civil rights at the ballot.  Our reality is that we probably cannot win such contests in, say, Oklahoma or Mississippi. At least not in the foreseeable future. Hopefully the courts will nullify the need to test those limits. On that front, we may have more information early next week when we hopefully learn which marriage cases the Supreme Court chooses to hear.

Enhanced by Zemanta

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.