Creationist Wisdom #190: Gay Marriage

Today, dear reader, we bring you a letter-to-the-editor titled Gay marriage is argument on life’s origin , which appears in the Auburn Citizen of Auburn, New York . We’ll give you a few excerpts, enhanced with our Curmudgeonly commentary, and as we usually do we’ll omit the writer’s name and city. Here we go, with a bit of bold font added for emphasis:

The whole idea of whether “gay#” [sic] marriages ought to be legalized is really an argument about the origin of life and human existence. If human beings are the product of special creation, i.e. “intelligent design#,” [sic] then clearly homosexual behavior is a violation of the intended use of the body.

Given the letter-writer’s premise of divinely intended usage of body parts, it follows that any unholy (perhaps we should say ungodly) behavior, legalized or not, refutes creationism. No wonder he wants such conduct to be illegal. Moving along:

If however human life is nothing more than a series of genetic mistakes or mutations occurring over millions of years with no intelligent supervision then the argument for homosexual marriages would be a legitimate one. If there were no Creator or laws governing human behavior, why stop with gay marriage? Shouldn’t people be allowed to marry their pets?

Yes! If creationism is wrong, then marriage to your goldfish makes a lot of sense. Let’s read on:

This might hasten the process of evolution. What about incest, pedophiles, even mass murder (survival of the fittest)? These choices could be successfully argued with evolution as a premise.

Evolution leads to incest, pedophilia, and mass murder! Hey, this guy could get a job writing for the Discoveroids. We continue:

In spite of all the scientific terminology, artists’ renditions of missing links and the geologic record, there is not a shred of scientific proof for Darwinian evolution. Darwinism, like Christianity, is a faith-based belief system which is being used as a guide for human behavior.

You gotta admit — he knows what he’s talking about. Here’s more:

Science can no more prove the unobserved past than it can prove the future. When America followed the teachings of Jesus Christ and the Ten Commandments were the standard by which our society governed itself, then the great American experiment of self-government worked well.

The letter-writer is not only a science genius, he’s also a great historian. Creationists are often multi-talented like that. Here’s the end:

When America and the American people can no longer tell the difference between what is right or wrong based upon an unchanging foundation of truth, then the America of self-government and elected representation is over. Let’s not let that happen.

Auburn, New York must be a great place to visit. But so is the Creation Museum in Kentucky. There are so many choices …

Copyright © 2011. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.

add to del.icio.usAdd to Blinkslistadd to furlDigg itadd to ma.gnoliaStumble It!add to simpyseed the vineTailRankpost to facebook

. AddThis Social Bookmark Button . Permalink for this article

16 responses to “Creationist Wisdom #190: Gay Marriage

  1. Dr. Gary Hurd’s already commented there. He’s quick.

  2. Lynn Wilhelm says: “He’s quick.”

    Yup. But I’m quicker. I posted before there were any comments.

  3. I know this is about creationism…but it really worries me that there are people out there such as this letter writer (and Santorum) who are unable to discern the difference between consenting adults and their pets. Frankly, they scare me.

  4. Sorry about the Anonymous post. I forgot to enter my name. Senior Moments are…not nice.

  5. comradebillyboy

    And did you notice Rick “man on dog” Santorum has just announced he is running for president. It is no surprise that our creationist fundamentalist friends have an unhealthy obsession with other people’s sex lives.

  6. Normally I eschew generalizations, but it’s a safe bet that any creationist is against same-sex marriage. Both issues square with Biblical “literalism.”

  7. James F says: “Normally I eschew generalizations”

    People who generalize are all creeps.

  8. On the other hand, I think he is on the right track about, “Both parties have been bought off by well-financed special interest groups and lobbyist who are dominating the politics of this country.”

  9. I’m a bit confused. can someone explain, “If human beings are the product of special creation, i.e. “intelligent design#,” then clearly homosexual behavior is a violation of the intended use of the body.”

    Where did gays come from?

  10. RogerE, this is why the theocrats are so hung up on sexuality being a choice. Teh gheyz are evil sinners, and their dirty, filthy choice shouldn’t be validated.

  11. It’s all Soros’ fault. No, it’s the Koch brother’s fault. No, it’s the Illuminati’s fault. No, it’s Bush’s fault. No, it can’t be, it’s Obama’s fault. No,…

    Well, darn, it must be somebody’s fault!

  12. Tundra Boy says: “Well, darn, it must be somebody’s fault!”

    Don’t you know? It’s all Darwin’s fault.

  13. Cheryl Shepherd-Adams

    Reminds me of Kansas’ former AG Phill Kline, who thought fellatio was fine but cunnilingus was criminal between 15-year-old boy and 15-year-old girl. More panty politics. Blech. http://jgrr.blogspot.com/2006/02/law.html

  14. I assume, Cheryl, that there was no Mrs. Kline.

  15. Amazingly the article takes comments. Check my imitation of a John West tantrum. AFAIK, he’s the only Discoveroid who sometimes forgets to bite his tongue when one of their own rubes confuses creationism with ID.

  16. Frank J, that was pretty darn good!