In the traditional sense, certainly not. But in a different sense, all the time.

gay shotgun wedding

But first, what is the difference between a traditional “shotgun” wedding and its same-sex counterpart.

A traditional shotgun wedding is where a member of the bride’s family forces a marriage between a man and a woman by holding a gun on the groom.

In contrast, the same-sex parallel of a traditional shotgun wedding is where a same-sex couple holds a metaphorical “gun” on everyone else. And that typically includes . . .

  • Wedding officiators
  • Venue operators
  • Florists
  • Photographers
  • Bakers
  • And on and on . . ..

. . . kind of funny, but it’s no joke.

The traditional shotgun wedding was grounded in a strongly held belief that traditional marriage produced a social good so necessary it was worth pursuing even at the point of a gun — most often for the purpose of legitimating children by legally connecting them to their biological father.

Not so with same-sex marriages. Kids are needed in them to legitimate the marriage, not themselves. Ironically, same-sex marriages often function to actually disconnect kids from their biological parents, not vice versa. So add several more hostages to the list of those being forced to cooperate in gay marriage at metaphorical “gun point.”

  • Biological parents and their biological children
  • Adoption agencies
  • Fertility clinics
  • Surrogate mothers

Truth is gay marriages and the LGBT ideology that undergirds them are increasingly becoming the most oppressive influences in American life. Here is a short list of what we lose when both are mainstreamed by force into our culture:

  • Marriage — the right to legally distinguish real marriage from fake marriage.
  • Freedom of speech — the right to tell the truth about marriage, sex, and gender without losing our livelihood or our liberty.
  • Freedom of religion — the right to exercise our religion in the public arena.
  • The Bill of Rights and the Constitution in general — the protection of rights explicitly delineated in the Constitution over against “rights” read into the Constitution by ideologically-driven courts.
  • Freedom of conscience — the right to refuse participation in speech and acts that go against deeply held beliefs.
  • The free market — the right not to sell products and services we would otherwise choose not to sell.
  • Equal treatment before the law — the right to be treated the same as other people under the same circumstances. Jews are not forced to sell “kosher” ham sandwiches. Muslims are not forced to sell paintings of Mohammed. Pet-store owners are not forced to sell puppies to eat.
  • Our children — the right to socialize our children according to the values and virtues we hold dearly.
  • The innocence of children — the right to have our children protected from the indecencies of gay propaganda.
  • Our physical identity — the right to our own biological mothers and fathers.
  • Our safety — the right to be protected from the reckless behavior of others.
  • Our health — the right to seek medical care for unwanted desires and behaviors.
  • Our money — the right not to participate in paying the costs of other people’s pathological lifestyles.
  • Full access to the public square — the right not to be “outed,” bullied, assaulted, or battered for simply upholding values that promote a just, prosperous, and enduring society.

So add a few more “gun-appointed” participants in same-sex marriage and the worldview that makes it possible:

  • Students and teachers
  • Parents, grandparents, husbands, wives, children
  • Businesses and employers of all kinds
  • Christians
  • Taxpayers
  • Healthcare consumers
  • Anyone else who doesn’t agree with LGBT ideology

Real marriage affects society in structured ways that argue powerfully for its legal recognition, regulation, and protection. It is procreative in form and can be consummated. Most importantly, it is unsurpassed in channeling male sexual energy to the benefit of women and children. It fosters the socialization of males and females toward traditional norms and is well-suited to the production of well-adjusted people needed to perpetuate society. It is supportive of, dependent on, and friendly toward the foundational social roles of father, mother, wife, and husband. Real marriage is thus able to make compelling claims on the resources and conscience of society for its preservation and expansion.

None of these things is true of gay marriage. A good illustration of the difference between real marriage versus gay marriage is an analogy between real money versus play money. One of two things has to be true for you to succeed in paying off a debt with play money instead of real money. Your creditor must be either (1) extremely gullible or (2) you have a gun.

Despite all the propaganda, most people aren’t gullible enough to believe same-sex marriage equals real marriage. That’s why champions of gay marriage need a “gun.” That’s why the existence of gay marriage depends so much on “shotgun weddings” between people who believe in it versus people who don’t.


historeo.comhistoreo 2

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

10 visitors online now
4 guests, 6 bots, 0 members

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox

Join other followers: