GAY MARRIAGE: THE DIVERSION TACTIC NON- ISSUE
Background for discussion:
The Ultimate Anti-Gay Marriage Ad
I think it’s time we realized that the discussion of “gay marriage” is a diversion tactic.
I am not limited to considering the purely personal aspects of marriage. Neither am I blinded by the romantic aspects of marriage.
I see marriage for the one-sided economic contract that it is.
There is something disingenuous about reactionary “progressive” positions.
This situation reminds me of when the Suffragettes were struggling for the “right” to vote.
It was then that Emma Goldman, in her social wisdom, told them: “If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.”
She told the women not to waste their time struggling for the “right” to vote instead of struggling for real social change. She understood that interested parties were just delighted to have women, who could have brought about a real Revolution, focussed on the non-issue of voting “rights”.
The same tack is now being used on the gays vis-a-vis marriage, which is a social contract that sells adults and children alike into slavery, and most people are falling for the same trick once again.
“Infomercials” like the one above are a ploy *by the people who want to institute gay marriage and keep the marriage laws as legal binding contracts*.
I remember the days when the anti-drug use ads and movies looked ridiculously un-hip, starting with “Reefer Madness” and ending with the “infomericial” in which a girl who stomps her hot dog to mush because it talked to her while she was “on acid”.
I used to think: How lame! Do they really think that anybody oh so cool and hip as me and my friends are going to be influenced by this to not use drugs?
Now I understand that those ‘public service announcements’ were carefully crafted to that appear that way by the gov’t, which was running the drugs and was at the height of MK Ultra.
Having had that experience, I know that anything that looks stupid – like George Bush’s “don’t misunderestimate me” – is not to be dismissed with a haughty smirk. I’ve seen this technique before, which is one of the reasons I know the System is back of the “gay movement”.
Always make sure you’re the one having the last laugh at anything that is being broadcasted. Someone who was smart enough to become very rich and influential is streaming the broadcast in your direction, not the other way around.
One of the things I’ve learned is to *always* objectively and dispassionately observe my first emotional reactions and my first thoughts to any broadcast and ask: Is this the emotional reaction and are these the thoughts the broadcast was intended to elicit?
That is *especially* important to do whenever my reaction involves feeling very, very clever or in any way self-satisfied.
Please take a look at the discussion under the subtopic: Legal Status here:
The fact that gays are not, as a group, bringing these issues to the table and are, instead, harping on the discussion of gay marriage, i.e., retaining the compulsory legal, binding and contractual aspects of monogamous marriage is, to my mind, highly suspect.
I mean, the only reason people are born “Queer” (vis-a-vis their society) is because they are meant to bring about social change for all who are laboring under the yoke of unbearable social conventions.
So, get on with the business of fomenting Social Revolution!
Doreen Ellen Bell-Dotan, Tzfat, Israel