Tom Toles by Tom Toles
- July 20, 2009
- From Beginning
- Previous feature
- Show Calendar
- Next feature
- Current
Editorials A-Z Navigation
Mike Thompson by Mike Thompson
Gary Varvel by Gary VarvelAbout Tom Toles
With his singular style, Tom Toles tackles the complex issues of the day. This Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist skillfully targets political, economic and social concerns — in particular complicated environmental issues — with a clear-eyed precision that hits the mark every time.
© 2009 Universal Press Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.
Comments (23) Jump to Comments Form
none.of.the.above said, 4 months ago
In reality, there really are things which are right and things which are wrong. If a society truly can’t distinguish between marriage and homosexual partnerships (or whatever you want to call them), it’s headed for a bad place.
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
If society can’t keep blacks in slavery, it’s headed for a bad place.
If society can’t keep women barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen, it’s headed for a bad place.
If society can’t put bigotry behind it, it’s headed for a bad place.
wittyvegan said, 4 months ago
Perhaps someone can explain to me how marriage can be destroyed by gays?
New idea: Legalize gay marriage and outlaw adultery.
cdward said, 4 months ago
How about this: eliminate “marriage” in the legal sense altogether. Create “civil unions” which have all the legal rights of marriage. Then, those who want to have the religious sanctification of their union can do so. In our church we distinguish between marriage (or civil union, take your pick) and Holy Matrimony.
4uk4ata said, 4 months ago
@ Cdward - which church is that?
dwyant said, 4 months ago
Let’s hope this mess doesn’t totally destroy our society.
mivins said, 4 months ago
Have you folks that are horrified at the idea of gay marriage ever met a gay couple? Ever talked with someone you know to be gay? Your opposition seems to be based on some very unpleasant and rather fantastic assumptions rather than the reality of what your neighbors, co-workers, and fellow citizens are like.
ezdeb said, 4 months ago
dwyant, your hope will come true! It’s not a mess, it won’t totally (or even partially) destroy our society, and it will be OK.
Americans often fear others. We integrated our schools and it didn’t destroy our society as people like you worried about. We gave darker people the right as citizens to vote, and it didn’t destroy us. Black kids can swim in a “whites only” private pool and it won’t destroy the facility for clean people, OK?
The cool thing about America is that we were founded with a basis in the rights of the individual, not the rights of whole groups. So when two individuals have a relationship that they want to recognize as marriage, have that commitment, contribute to society, etc, I just don’t see how that will destroy us. If you do, you must think that America is so very fragile that stuff like human relationships will destroy it.
We can take it if we’re as strong and brave as the people who suffer discrimination because they want to be married.
motivemagus said, 4 months ago
I know a number of gay couples, some married (I live in Massachusetts) – nice, suburban couples raising a couple of kids. No cause for alarm. Certainly doesn’t threaten *my* marriage (21 years+). Why should it?
And as someone noted, it’s a religious issue, which DOMA and other laws are invading openly. It’s none of government’s business, except insofar as there are legal benefits to the spouse. Civil unions would take care of that.
DrCanuck said, 4 months ago
Canada legalized gay marriage four years ago and we have yet to vanish in a maelstrom of hellfire and brimstone. Straight marriages haven’t suffered as a result, either.
LLeRay
said,
4 months ago
Hey, cdward, legal marriage will be around for as long as benefits and obligations are assigned by that institution. Marriage is, in general, good for society because it has many property transfer rights, health and privacy decision powers, and some social privileges attached to it. All those rights and obligations handled separately require a whole lot more legal work and would be less efficient.
dtroutma said, 4 months ago
Didn’t some guy once say, “The only thing we have to fear, is fear itself”? Fear IS the mantra of the radicals out to divert us from reality, or terrified and hateful of it themselves.
ezdeb said, 4 months ago
DrCanuck, are you saying that heterosexual married men have NOT found themselves suddenly and urgently compelled to experience homosexual marriage instead? Wha….?
But…but…..we’ve been told by Republicans that if two men take vows here in the U.S., not only will we get the brimstone, etc, but that soon, all Americans will be considering gay marriage for themselves even if they would normally be hetero!! I’ve heard here and there that Obama wants to force all Americans to be homosexual and to marry only black same-sex partners and I’m sure that’s accurate! Canada’s cowardly lack of fear enrages us and makes us fearful!
Also, you say it was legalized four years ago. Republicans may well say: “It’s well known that it take 5-7 years for the horror to descend on civilization! We’ll protect you!!”
I’m sure hoping that Doctor can tell this post is tongue-in cheek! : - )
ezdeb said, 4 months ago
Dtroutma, unfortunately, it was FDR that said those stirring words about “unreasoning fear”. Since it was the hated FDR, who did nothing good for this country according to any Republican you talk to, the famous American words won’t mean anything to David, HQ, Cogent, and none/above. History dissolves and context is disparaged in their minds.
DrCanuck said, 4 months ago
ez’, I have been enjoying your sense of humour for some time now. :)
none.of.the.above said, 4 months ago
I think it’s important to understand the difference between believing something is detrimental to society and being afraid of it. Characterizations like “homophobic” fail to do justice to this opinion. Witty Vegan is right; adultery is equally destructive. But you haven’t heard me suggest sanctions against either one.
Anthony 2816 (that’s a lot of Anthonys!); people are born with various skin colors, and even a majority of us are born women. I think that the purported science which puts homosexuality in the same catagory is not a fully explored subject, a mature science.
I can be respectful of others even if I think they are doing wrong.
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
If we aren’t born with our sexuality pre-wired, None, what was your life like before you chose to be heterosexual?
ezdeb said, 4 months ago
Ahem, none, I have to weigh in with 2816 on this. Over centuries, most cultures have persecuted homosexuality. Sometimes the persecution was milder, but most often it was pretty extreme, like burning homosexuals alive, hangings, public stonings, etc. If a person chose to be homosexual, but equally could “choose” hetersexuality, what would be their incentive? People have had to hide and go to extreme lengths to disguise a compelling portion of their lives! The risk/benefit ratio is too high, if you can just choose to get sex easily another way, right?
So many famous people lost their careers when they were “outed”, so many non-famous people struggle with how to relate to their families over their homosexuality. Why would they choose this instead of “normalcy”?
fritzoid said, 4 months ago
What this argument often boils down to for God’s Sex Police is the difference between “sexual inclination” and “sexual behavior”. Just as, according to many strains of theology, we’re all “born sinful” but can CHOOSE not to act on our sinful desires, so (they feel) can a person who is born homosexual (or is “made” homosexual by some perverted molester as a child) live righteously so long as they don’t engage in homosexual acts. “Love the sinner, hate the sin” means for them “It’s all right to WANT to have sex with someone of your own gender, just so long as you DON’T ACTUALLY DO IT!” In that respect, if you can’t train yourself to WANT sex with the opposite gender, you should hold your nose and do it anyway! Or else you can be CELIBATE, which is even better!
Anthony 2816
said,
4 months ago
Although, Fritz, I’ve also found many fundie christians who, with a complete ignorance of genetics, claim that homosexuals can’t be a natural part of the population because they don’t usually reproduce, meaning their “gay gene” can’t be passed on.
I try pointing out the concept of recessive genes, and how there are genetic diseases like Potter’s Syndrome that kill soon after birth, yet stay in our gene pool (in a small percentage) forever. That’s usually enough to make them shut up for the time being, until they can continue their ignorance elsewhere.
fritzoid said, 4 months ago
Eh. St. Paul considered marriage to be a necessary evil for those who didn’t have enough strength for celibacy anyway…
andejas1 said, 4 months ago
hey wittyvegan adultery is already illegal…
M Henri Day said, 4 months ago
A handy issue, to distract from wars of aggression in foreign lands, and corruption and economic collapse at home. That’s why political campaigns are based on this non-issue. Let those who who have reached the statutory age and wish to marry marry and those who don’t avoid doing so. There are, in fact, issues which require more public engagement than what happens in people’s bedrooms (or refrigerators, or whatever)….
Henri