Peter Sprigg has a new theory to invalidate same-sex marriage

Peter Sprigg is Family Research Council's go-to bigot on the gay. Wednesday Sprigg writes: “Gallup Poll Shows Few Same-Sex Couples Marry Despite Supreme Court OK.” Sprigg, whose profession is really Baptist minister, is one of the reasons that FRC maintains its “hate group” status. Before I get into this, Sprigg's real problem is that he absurdly predicted that same-sex marriage would cause “fewer people to remain monogamous and sexually faithful.” He also said that, as a consequence of same-sex marriage, fewer people would remain married for a lifetime. The real gem was the prediction that marriage equality would cause birthrates to fall. Same-sex marriage would also cause polygamy to be legalized.

None of that seems to have happened or seems likely to happen. The Sprigg is on the lookout for arguments that he can offer in substitution. He is replacing absurdities with insanity.

Here is Sprigg's eureka today:

“Same-Sex Marriages Up One Year After Supreme Court Verdict” was the headline Gallup used, reporting that “approximately 123,000 same-sex marriages have taken place since the Obergefell v. Hodges decision.”
[…]
The real news in the Gallup survey—missed by virtually every news outlet that reported on it—is not how many same-sex couples have now obtained civil marriages, but how few.

Who cares and what difference does that make?

“Gallup currently estimates 3.9% of U.S. adults are lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender,” the report says. How many of those are married? “Currently, 9.6% of LGBT adults report being married to a same-sex spouse.”

Wait a minute—after all the hullabaloo over same-sex marriage, all the insistence that marriage was essential to affirm the dignity of lesbian and gay Americans—less than one in ten have even bothered to take advantage of this critical new “right?”

And all that without getting Sprigg's approval. It is going to require decades for gay culture to adapt to the notion of finding the right person to whom one gets engaged and then married. I would be willing to bet that gay couples raising children are disproportionately married. Most importantly though is the concept that Equal Protection is not predicated on the number of people who are equally protected. Sprigg's opus goes on and on with percentages to prove, … something. It is all irrelevant.

Tonight's wine selection seems especially appropriate:

Related articles

• FRC's Peter Sprigg is now an HIV expert
• FRC's Sprigg doesn't read what he links to - or doesn't think that his audience will bother
• Peter Sprigg has a new theory
• NOM in denial while FRC's Sprigg is now an inept lawyer
• FRC is having a transgender policy summit
• Tony Perkins hears a hate group echo
• Tony Perkins believes that he has a First Amendment right to be on TEEvee
• Now FRC's Peter Sprigg is an economist - and not a very competent one
• Exactly what is Mr. Sprigg's expertise?
• Another hate group (FRC) - Same BS