For those puzzling over why sensible people have lost the “marriage” issue to the homosexual bullies: I just listened to Laura Ingraham’s analysis of the Supreme’s knotheaded decision to shoot down the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and deny Californians the right to uphold the traditional meaning of the institution. I guess she agrees with Scalia’s dissent — I say “I guess” because, although Laura typically, acerbically leaves scant room for doubt about where she stands on any issue, it’s kind of hard to tell here.
The outspokenly pro-life, fiercely Catholic, usually take-no-prisoners Ms. Ingraham clearly doesn’t want to focus much on this matter. Quite often, there is an evident reluctance on her part to engage the question whenever it makes the headlines. Could it be because — as she publicly has stated on numerous occasions — her brother is homosexual? There’s gotta be some explanation because the normally fire-breathing talk host goes a bit squishy on many matters “gay”.
She and a lesbian caller, for instance, shared a warm-and-fuzzy moment chatting — that’s the word to use: “chatting” — about this morning’s Court ruling. This particular lesbian, a Vermont mother raising her son with her same-sex “partner”, didn’t overly care if the federal government conferred upon them the “married” designation. “You sound cool,” remarked Laura, skating chillingly over the fact that this woman was, essentially, still promoting the poisonous notion that FATHERS are dispensable.
Two moms, two dads, one of each — what’s the difference? Is that it, Laura?
Those who push that lie are “cool”? Not in my book, nor in THE book; not ever.
Laura Ingraham, probably, would prefer “marriage” officially maintain the meaning it has always had. However, in between the wink-wink bumper music she’s been playfully running since the Court “came out” with its marital-warping nonsense (Frank Sinatra’s “Love and Marriage”, Abba’s “Dancing Queen”, etc.) and her chummy back-and- forths with callers who make a mockery of the importance of moms AND dads, it’s clear this whole shebang really isn’t that big a deal to her.
And remember: Laura Ingraham would be ranked one of the premiere “Socially Conservative” voices on today’s media landscape.
Similarly, while Glen Beck, across the AM dial from Ms. Laura, pretty much deplored the Court’s finding immediately upon its announcement, he also herniated himself for moments on end affirming how many personal, respectful relationships he has with homosexuals. Why, he’s hired a bunch of homosexual employees! Even a same-sex “married” couple !! (See my column deploring the exasperating Christian/Conservative habit of acting defensively and ashamed while presenting our principles.)
We get it, Glen: You don’t “hate” homosexuals – that’s good. We shouldn’t “hate” anyone.