Per a WCBS report . . .
Paladino tried to give out lollipops at Monday’s Columbus Day parade, but he was mobbed by reporters after he told a Brooklyn Hassidic group he didn’t want kids “brainwashed” into thinking gay marriage is a “valid” option. . . .Meanwhile Andrew Cuomo was marching in a "gay pride" parade with his two daughters (it was National Coming Out Day).
“I unequivocally support all gay rights, all gay rights except the right to be married. I’m a Catholic and I believe in Catholic values,” Paladino said.
“Have you ever been to one? The men wear little Speedos and they grind on each other. Would you take your children there? I don’t think so,” Paladino said.Carl has a point there. Most people would feel it inappropriate to expose their children to such behavior. . . .
The gubernatorial candidates clearly are on opposite sides in what people on Fox would call "The Culture Wars." Cuomo and a representative from GLAAD criticized Paladino's remarks . . .
“They were reckless in light of all the recent violence that we’ve had. They were divisive. They were the worst cynical politics trying to pit people against one another, trying to pit groups against one another,” Cuomo said. “It is repugnant to the content of what New York is.” . . .
“We’re sending a message to young people that it’s okay to discriminate, it’s okay to commit violent acts, that it’s okay for gay kids to kill themselves and that’s not okay, particularly in a place in a country that supposedly values all of us,” said Jarrett Barrios of The Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.
Actually it is Mr. Cuomo and Ms. Barrios who are pitting groups against each other. Mr. Paladino never said it is OK to discriminate, never said it is OK to commit violent acts, and never said it is OK for gay kids to kill themselves. All he said is that he did not believe that gay marriage was a "valid" option. He was only being honest about his beliefs.
Given the fact that 6,000 years of human tradition is on Mr. Paladino's side, it is presumptuous for Mr. Cuomo, Ms. Barrios, and a number of legislating judges across the nation to say otherwise.
The discussion of "gay marriage" gets off track when it focuses on "rights." Marriage was never intended for the purpose of conferring "rights" on individuals. Rather, marriage was instituted to perpetuate society by injecting stability into a union because of its potential for children. Since two people of the same sex have no potential to procreate, it makes no sense to apply the concept of "marriage" to them... i.e. as Mr. Paladino says, it is not a "valid" option.
It's refreshing to see a candidate being himself -- warts and all -- rather than someone who is carefully managed to always say the right things to the right people. This will be an interesting election.
8 comments:
I agree completly.
Marriage is between a man and a woman. I don't know what God said, but that's what my wife said. Oh, and she added, "a man and only one woman." Cuomo probably understands neither.
Ok, we have millions of people out of work, millions of homes being foreclosed on, our economy in a shambles, we're at war with Al Queida, millions without health care, the entire country practically bankrupt, etc., etc, & we're worried about gay marriage. Gimme a break. Personally, I don't give a damn whether gay marriage is instituted or not. This is nothing but a side show whereby politicians like Paladino & Cuomo can use the issue to appeal to the least common denominator, i.e. people that have nothing better to do with their time other than to bash a lifestyle that they don't approve of. Meanwhile the real problems we're facing get swept aside. One idiotic remark makes headlines while the country goes down the drain. Pathetic.
Although one sympathizes with the view that economic issues are prime in this election cycle, one should not so eagerly cast aside the cornerstone of our culture, marriage and families. There is nothing idiodic about expecting our political representatives to make their positions clear on cultural issues. Materialistic matters are rationally and historically much less important to societal health.
"Materialistic matters are rationally and historically much less important to societal health."
Yes, just ask Hitler, Polpot, Stalin, Castro, et. al. They could have cared less about materialistic matters (other than when seizing power) and more aobut societal health. Thank you for condoning the Holocaust and Milosovich's genocide (arguably to protect societal health).
Hitler,Polpot, Stalin, Castro- interestingly all godless. That clearly proves the point that the cultural/belief structures of societies breed the good and the evil. The quest for goods and services is an outgrowth of the societies foundations. Capitalism could not have developed without the foundation of religeous freedom and the Judeo/Christain ethic. That veiw hardly condones despotism.
Whoa. . . No one posting here has condoned the Holocaust or genocide.
To accuse someone of same is merely and attempt to marginalize the person to whom the comment was directed ... to stop a rational discussion.
Like calling someone racist because they disagree with the President.
Or to prove a point that it is silly to believe that economic issues are irrelevant to societal norms.
Post a Comment