But I digress. It's really all about religious values, something that has never had to be supported by a body of evidence to be considered superior to all other viewpoints. Ms Parker biblically challenges Ms Cheney, apparently forgetting the same was done many years ago in an effort to maintain the tradition of slavery and keeping women in the home.
With little thought, she glosses over the truth that this is not about freedom but about the exchange of one source of authority for our laws and values for another. Will it be the Bible or Mary Cheney's youthful passions and impulses?
I'm thinking it's not going to be your bible, Ms Freedom Rings. While you have every right to your beliefs, you have no right whatsoever to force those beliefs onto others — personally or constitutionally. This white heterosexual agnostic woman (who grew up poor at the same time you did) would rather you stayed the hell out of everyone's marital goings-on before you start using scripture to force every woman on this planet into the missionary position in preparation for her barren sister's husband.
Article comments
1 - Brian Sorrell
Nicely done Diana.
It sounds to me as if Ms. Parker suffers from a disastrous collision of "Slippery Slope" and "Begging the Question" -- among other popular fallacies. I'm suprised that she didn't hurt herself.
2 - SteveS
That's a good article. I recently blogged my own plight in regards to marriage and was surprised to find the article was picked up by the Washington Blade BlogWatch.
Basically my sister, who I love dearly and had no intention of making her an example :-), got married recently. Her son is going off to college and she has no plans to have any more children.
Should her husband die, she now gets social security benefits and the whole protection of assets, etc.
Here I am with my partner and a 3 year old daughter and if my partner dies, we're basically going to become homeless because we won't get squat back from something we are required by law to pay into.
Families, real families suffer by this discrimination. Nobody is harmed by the inclusion, but people ARE harmed by the exclusion.
The government's recognition of family shouldn't be based on biblical tradition. Our government shouldn't be based on the Bible at all. I should be free from being held to biblical standards.
3 - NR Davis
Very well said, Steve.
4 - gulickgurl
That was said better than I could ever put words together Diana. I don't understand why this has to be such and issue. Rights, it's about rights, and not the Bible.
Thank you!
5 - therese
...without the gay dollar. you're a kidder. =) good article, lady.
6 - Lily H.
Star, Star, Star...when EVER will she quit?
For all her supposed conservative stances,
she needs to examine her life a mite closer
than the gays or others "beneath her station"
so to speak.
For all her "traditional values", Star has
been divorced for some time from the preacher
husband she'd married (read her first book),
though nowhere on her website does that appear.
Also, her second daughter from said marriage
DIED at the age of 14 after hanging out with
friends at a teenage nightclub in her area
in Orange County, yes, the sane O.C. of TV
fame. Wonder where Mom was when her child was
out doing what Mom used to do when she was
a "welfare queen"? Star is a sham artist of
the highest order.
7 - F S Jones
And don't forget the multiple abortions she's had (at least 3 by her own count). But then it was the abortion provider's fault she had them, according to one biography.