NOM BLOG

Newt to Faith Leaders: Gay Marriage a "Fundamental Violation of our Civilization"

 

On a call with faith leaders, Newt Gingrich said about gay marriage:

"Marriage is between a man and a woman. This is a historic doctrine driven deeply into the bible. Both in the old testament and in the new testament. And it's a perfect example of what I mean by the rise of paganism. The effort to create alternatives to marriage between a man and a woman are perfectly natural pagan behaviors but they are a fundamental violation of our civilization."

26 Comments

  1. JR
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    How can anyone take Newt seriously when he talks about marriage?

  2. QueerNE
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 1:16 pm | Permalink

    ...Is there something wrong with paganism?

  3. Rich
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

    Bob Dole said he had an idea a minute and most of them were crazy....this may be the craziest.

  4. Little man
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

    Comments 1,2 and 3 are talking like pagans, as expected. It's about consequences to society, not what anyone would want out of vanity. Paganism is a series of religions, trying to pose as non-religious.

  5. JR
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    Little Man - I am a Catholic, not a pagan. Mr. Gingrich is free to live his life however he chooses just as I will be to decide whether to vote for him should he be in the ballot come November. Based on the way he has lived his life, I cannot take seriously any statements he makes with regard to marriage.

  6. Randy E King
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    Yet you still thought his position serious enough to comment on?

  7. Layne
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

    One man, one mistress! Right, Mr. Speaker??

  8. Louis E.
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 4:24 pm | Permalink

    JR,to the extent that you refuse to condemn same-sex sexual activity,you are not Catholic,according to those who have the authority to decide that.Your church is not a democracy.

    (I am not religious and do not object in principle to consensual polygamous relationships in which all sexual activity is between persons of opposite sexes).

  9. John Noe
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

    Newt is right when he talks about marriage , but sadly he has not lived up to it. If he had the nomination the choice for president would be between someone who understands the importance and knows what marriage is but does not live by it, and a president who has been faithfull to his wife and children but supports the sodomites agenda of destroying marriage.

    This is why I am voting for either Mitt or Rick in the primary next March.

  10. Layne
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 6:47 pm | Permalink

    Obama is against gay marriage, John. Id love to have his support on it but I'm not holding my breath.

  11. QueerNE
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 7:23 pm | Permalink

    Little man--You haven't established a wrongness in paganism.

  12. Louis E.
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 8:11 pm | Permalink

    Layne,I'm a Democrat who voted for Obama and expects to do so again,but his criticism of DOMA repels me.

  13. Layne
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 8:41 pm | Permalink

    If you think DOMA is so full-proof, Louis, then you go to court and defend it.

    I'd love to watch you tell a federal judge why same-sex military couples can't have the same health insurance benefits that opposite-sex military couples are entitled to.

    Google McLauhglin et al v Panetta et al and learn something.

  14. Leo
    Posted January 30, 2012 at 11:46 pm | Permalink

    Layne,
    If you think DOMA is so full-proof, Louis, then you go to court and defend it.

    I'd love to watch you tell a federal judge why same-sex military couples can't have the same health insurance benefits that opposite-sex military couples are entitled to.

    @ Layne
    it wouldn't be much of an argument...
    It's a no brainer, opposite sex couple does not equal to same same sex relationships of "any find". I guess you did not learn that is school, you were pre-occupied with alien anatomy instead of human anatomy...

    Write this down so we want have to go over it against, SSM coupling benefit to society as we it, equal zero. whereas opposites sex coupling equals human existance in our Nation and in the world... Therefore, govt is for the people, the people who made govt, whom gives benefits to those forms of coupling-men and women coming in committed relationships- for a bigger purpose than just themselves.

  15. Leo
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 12:10 am | Permalink

    And Louis if you vote for Obama again, we'll have to terminate your membership here...

  16. Louis E.
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 1:30 am | Permalink

    Layne,I never said we didn't need a constitutional amendment to prohibit attempts to undermine DOMA,only that it serves a useful purpose and the President should be trying to uphold it against the claims made by its opponents.And there definitely should be no same-sex couples in the military!!

  17. Layne
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 3:54 am | Permalink

    Did you read the filing? Clearly not. Most of the same-sex couples in the lawsuit had only ONE member serving in the military. The other partners are legally recognized spouses in the states where they reside who are being denied military benefits that all opposite-sex military spouses are entitled to.

    The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have been fighting for your freedoms as far back as Nam.

    Please tell me where DOMA serves a useful purpose again?

  18. maggie gallagher
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    30 percent of Democrats oppose same-sex marriage. Appreciate that special brand of courage!

  19. OrthodoxJew
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 11:09 am | Permalink

    John Noe:
    I share your sentiments. I strongly encourage you to vote for Rick Santorum: the ONLY candidate with both a moral personal life and a clear determination to take action against gay marriage. (I am afraid that Romney will avoid social issues altogether.)

  20. Louis E.
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 2:58 pm | Permalink

    Layne,among other socially useful purposes DOMA prevents claims of undeserved benefits by those attempting to represent their same-sex relationships as marriages on the pretext of state laws that need to be abolished!

  21. Layne
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

    So we're back to "same-sex relationships aren't real because I say so!"

    And the other genius up top: "SSM coupling doesn't benefit society."

    With logic like that you should both totally be defending DOMA in front of the judges.

  22. Posted January 31, 2012 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

    "same-sex relationships aren't real because I say so!"

    Here's what we can say about SS relationships:

    1) Not all of them are sexual in nature.
    2) Some of them include siblings or a parent and child of the same-sex.
    3) A small percentage are between two individuals are sexually attracted to the same sex
    4) SSM only wants to cater to those #3.
    5) SS"M" gives no valid reason to exclude those ss relationships in #1 or #2.
    6) SS"M" doesn't clearly define the boundaries between marriage relationships and all other SS relationships not granted marriage.
    7) SS"M" offers no rational reason or legally defensible argument against "more-somes," whether same-sexed or not. All arguments against more-somes become arbitrary constructs of the state, having no basis in the natural two-sexed basis of humanity, nor do they take into account the sexual gender complementarity of men and woman.

    "SSM coupling doesn't benefit society."

    Well, why don't you make a case for it. :)

  23. Leo
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 7:13 pm | Permalink

    My post @ 14 revised:

    @ Layne
    it wouldn't be much of an argument...
    It's a no brainer, opposite sex couples does not equal to same same sex relationships of "any kind". I guess you did not learn that is school, you were pre-occupied with alien anatomy instead of human anatomy...

    Write this down so we won't have to go over it again, SSM coupling benefit to society as we know it, equals zero. Whereas opposites sex coupling equals human existence in our Nation and in the world... Therefore, govt is for the people, the people who made govt, whom gives benefits to those forms of coupling-men and women coming together in committed relationships- for a bigger purpose than just themselves.
    ________________________________________
    And the other genius up top: "SSM coupling doesn't benefit society."

    With logic like that you should both totally be defending DOMA in front of the judges.

    Thank you for the compliment! If they would only ask me!

  24. Louis E.
    Posted January 31, 2012 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

    Layne,the existence of two sexes in the species automatically renders all same-sex relationships mistakes,no matter what anyone says.

  25. Layne
    Posted February 1, 2012 at 12:04 am | Permalink

    LOL...Okay, Louis. Whatever you say, bro.

    Keep your eyes on the court docket. When the first hearing is scheduled, make sure you take a trip to the courthouse so you can, in person, tell the plaintiffs (who fought for YOUR freedoms) that their relationships are mistakes and their families do not deserve full health coverage.

  26. Louis E.
    Posted February 1, 2012 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

    Nothing against their families,Layne,only those they falsely call their families!