An Ad Against Marriage Equality

Someone recorded a commercial about the terrible dangers of marriage equality that expresses what these people really seem to think will happen if gay people are allowed to get married.

16 comments on this post.
  1. hunter:

    That’s been around the gay blogosphere as the perfect ad in favor of marriage equality. The expression on the little girl’s face is priceless.

  2. Trebuchet:

    I’m pretty sure I’ve seen a serious anti-equality ad that looked almost exactly like that!

  3. mrianabrinson:

    Um… A bit melodramatic… Aside from that, where do people get such ideas? Were white people forced to marry black people after 1967 (after Loving v. Virginia)? I could make that argument as a white woman who married a black man years after Loving v Virginia. That argument that people will be forced to marry the same sex is just stupid. As for love of children, my mother loves me and she loves her grandsons. That argument is just as lame, if not lamer.

    Of course my grandmother, who was born in 1913, treated my sons as if they were children of the Plantation, but days before she died, she apologized to us. I don’t know why. Maybe, as an Xian, she didn’t want to die with some sort of “sin” hanging over her head, but I think a more rational thought would be that she came around before she died and I think others could, eventually, concerning gay marriage.

    When people are treated equally, it makes for a better and more understanding world.

    From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loving_v._Virginia

    “In June 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the issuance of the Supreme Court’s decision in Loving, commenting on the comparison between interracial marriage and same-sex marriage, Mildred Loving issued a statement in relation to Loving v. Virginia and its mention in the ongoing court case Perry v. Brown:
    “I believe all Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry… I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.”

    I feel the same way as Mildred Loving concerning this stupidity over marriage, whether or not others believe one can compare the various arguments (including religious arguments) or not. It doesn’t matter if one believes there is a comparison or not. Bottom line is that everyone deserves marriage equality and all the arguments against same-sex marriage, and the reactions after 1967, are just as lame as those found in the Loving v Virginia case. Yes, same-sex marriage will increase, just as interracial marriage did, but that’s called freedom and equality, not forced marriage.

  4. marcus:

    mrianabrinson @2 You may be forgiven for thinking this was an authentic anti-marriage eq

  5. marcus:

    Stupid computer! mrianabrinson @3 You can be forgiven for thinking that this is an authentic anti-marriage equality ad. The real ones are just as stupid.This one however is a satire.Thank you for speaking out forcefully and directly in support of marriage equality, you are absolutely correct in your arguments. Equality and justice for all!

  6. mrianabrinson:

    @marcus Thanks, but you are right the real videos and arguments are just as stupid and irritate me just as much as the satire does.

    However, the satire is very close to the real arguments and African-American attorneys, according to Care2, are allegedly saying, “We’ve heard these arguments before” and we have. They list some of them in the article, which are similar to the satire: http://www.care2.com/causes/african-american-lawyers-weve-heard-these-anti-marriage-equality-arguments-before.html Thus, you can probably understand my irritated confusion between satire and reality. I will admit though, I’ve always had a problem telling the difference between satire and the real thing, probably because satire is often very close to the real thing, triggering a tangent in me. I don’t know if I’ll ever find the humour in satire (or tell the difference), but it is one of the things I’ve been trying to work on in recent years. Thank you for pointing it out to me and forgiving me, even though I feel a bit embarrassed by my lack of knowing/understanding satire humour.

  7. marcus:

    mrianabrinson You are a jewel.

  8. mrianabrinson:

    Oh and btw, you are very welcome for the support and all. It is my honest feelings and thoughts concerning the subject of same-sex marriage and equality, which I highly support.

  9. mrianabrinson:

    “7

    marcus
    March 9, 2013 at 11:00 am (UTC -5) Link to this comment
    mrianabrinson You are a jewel.”

    Thank you.

  10. Bronze Dog:

    The big problem with using satire these days is that we live alongside sincere absurdities who try to one-up each other and double down when called on it.

  11. MikeMa:

    The closing frame with “OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE” text missed an opportunity. It might have been, “OPPOSE MARRIAGE by GAYS” and added a little extra hysteria.

    I think satire works best when it gets close to the true, if absurd, message being sent. Just another way to point and laugh at the lunacy of marriage inequality.

  12. democommie:

    “The big problem with using satire these days is that we live alongside sincere absurdities who try to one-up each other and double down when called on it.”

    It’s, like, “Poe, Poe, pitiful me. Poe, Poe, pitiful me. I read stories too nuts to believe, but they’re true, I see. Woe., woe is me.”*.

    I predict that we will have concrete proof that MurKKKa has reached the tipping point on acceptance of teh GAY nuptials when Walmart has a “GAY Marriage Registry”.

    *Apologies to Warren Zevon

  13. Michael Heath:

    mrianabrinson writes:

    . . . where do people get such ideas? Were white people forced to marry black people after 1967 (after Loving v. Virginia)?

    Well, in all fairness to Thurston and Lovey; it’s a lot harder prohibiting daughter Kennedy from marrying Malik once we legalized miscegenation.

  14. jnorris:

    From what I gather on the blogospheres, what North Korea has planned for us is nothing compared to whatever the Christian Reich hopes will happen when same-gender marriage is legal in the USA.
    !! Never forget what happened to Canada !!

  15. xmaseveeve:

    mrian, you are so lovely. Thank you for your comments. Satire has a duty to go just a little too silly, here and there, to show how sillier the true parts are.

  16. Childermass:

    The real shame is that ad will not be seen by those who really need to see it. How much would it cost a pro-equality group to get it aired just once? The news would then hopefully run segments of it for weeks…

Leave a comment

You must be