Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Rick Moran

Bio

March 30, 2013 - 8:23 am

Dr. Ben Carson is an urbane, sophisticated, very intelligent man, as he has demonstrated in his public appearances over the last few months.

So what possessed him to say this to Sean Hannity on Fox the other night?

Marriage is between a man and a woman. No group, be they gays, be they NAMBLA, be they people who believe in bestiality, it doesn’t matter what they are. They don’t get to change the definition.

Carson’s apologized by implying that people misunderstood what he was saying:

“I think people have completely taken the wrong meaning out of what I was saying,” the 61-year-old surgeon said in a telephone interview Friday. “First of all, I certainly believe gay people should have all the rights that anybody else has. What I was basically saying is that as far as marriage is concerned that has traditionally been between a man and a woman and nobody should be able to change that.”

“Now perhaps the examples were not the best choice of words, and I certainly apologize if I offended anyone,” he added. “But the point that I was making was that no group of individuals, whoever they are, whatever their belief systems, gets to change traditional definitions. The reason I believe the way I do, I will readily confess, is because I am a Christian who believes in The Bible.”

The Bible, he explained, “…says we have an obligation to love our fellow man as ourselves, and I love everybody the same — all homosexuals. Everybody who knows me knows I would never say anything to intentionally hurt someone.”

It should be noted that if he believes that gays should have “all the rights anyone else has,” then he should be supporting gay marriage. Obviously, it was an inartful way to say he doesn’t think gays should be discriminated against — a position at odds with most of the Republican base who don’t think gays should be protected under affirmative action law.

Carson may not have meant to offend, but he connected the tired, old myths about gays and gay marriage that have been consistently debunked to the movement to legalize gay marriage. The notion that most (if not all) gay men are pedophiles and the idea that adopting gay marriage will lead to legalizing pedophilia and bestiality are strawman arguments, refuted by the facts and somewhat ridiculous. What judge or state legislature in their right mind is going to legalize pedophilia or bestiality? The argument is specious and insulting to boot.

Carson’s apology won’t satisfy those who don’t want to be satisfied — those who see an opportunity to tarnish the image of a rising political star for the GOP. But the real problem is that Carson wasn’t saying anything that much of the right wing doesn’t believe — and they can’t recognize the insult he made or the ignorance he displayed in making those claims.

Carson’s statement, no matter how well intentioned, points to the GOP’s real problem with figuring out how to talk about gays and gay marriage without sounding like a bunch of bigots.

Rick Moran is PJ Media's Chicago editor and Blog editor at The American Thinker. He is also host of the"RINO Hour of Power" on Blog Talk Radio. His own blog is Right Wing Nut House.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Mr. Moran: I do not know what you are thinking. This is deviant behavior and should not be given the term right or affirmative action status or extending marriage to these people that are 1% of the poplulation. It will not go well and it is like a gateway drug. The people asking for this extension of rights are asking for everyone to accept this as normal behavior. It is not. Just because they see deviant behavior as normal does not mean everyone else should have to accept that as normal or going forward. Getting called names because one can not go along with the deviant behavior is quite contrary to the norm in my opinion. Also as one of the other posters said: we are in a crisis situation in the economy, the immigration, the break down of law and order and many other issues. Giving this more press than it is due is just wrongheaded. I am a realist. This is not real. It is "feelings". When the people with all the 'feelings' don't get their way-right or wrong-they get all "hurt". I am hurt because the American people are getting kicked around like a bunch of step children on a bad day. Ben Carson is a man of priniciple. He comes forth as honest. He is not about hurting anyone. He just wants some sanity back as do I.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...the idea that adopting gay marriage will lead to legalizing pedophilia and bestiality are strawman arguments, refuted by the facts and somewhat ridiculous."

Why? If it's wrong to limit marriages to one man married to one woman, why isn't it wrong to limit marriages to a one man married to one man (or one woman to one woman)? Isn't it discriminatory to limit marriages to couples? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude children from marriage? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude farm animals from marriage? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude ANYONE or ANYTHING from marriage?

If it's NOT discriminatory to draw the line at only two individual adults, what is the basis for the limit?

"What judge or state legislature in their right mind is going to legalize pedophilia or bestiality? The argument is specious and insulting to boot."

No it's not. In fact, it's realistic. While pedophilia and bestiality may not be legalized at the same time as homosexual marriage, practitioners of those behaviors will simply go to court and demand equal treatment on the grounds that to do otherwise is to discriminate. And in the absence of any clear moral dividing line, they will win that case. They know this too.

When I lived in Canada in the 70s, they had a debate over allowing abortion. Many people were passionately against it since they felt it sanctioned infanticide. Eventually, the pro-abortion side was able to establish legilslation that allowed abortion "if necessary to save the life of the mother". Even this formulation was opposed by anti-abortionists but the politicians decided to go that way anyway. Before very long, they found that this bar was too high to allow for many abortions so the bar was lowered so that abortion was also allowed when it threatened the HEALTH of the mother. Then health was interpreted very broadly indeed to encompass mental health and the degree of harm was set so low that (apparently) even the discomfort of being pregnant was deemed damage to a mother's health and the Canadians effectively had abortion on demand.

I confidently predict that any loosening of the definition of marriage from the traditional one will very soon lead to the exact same sort of slippery slope regarding who can be deemed to be legally married. All it takes is an activist court and a few test cases and you'll see that same-sex marriage soon becomes a total free-for-all where any person or group can marry any other person or group. And that's just for starters. I won't be shocked to find that some will seek to marry animals or even things.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What "possessed" Dr. Carson to say what he said? Maybe because what he said about marriage being between a man and a woman is the truth!

And no opinion of yours, Mr. Moran, or anyone else's, will change the truth.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Can the GOP talk about *anything* without a bunch of *ussies accusing them of sounding like bigots?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"It should be noted that if he believes that gays should have “all the rights anyone else has,” then he should be supporting gay marriage."
---Rick Moran

Really?

Explain, first, how "marriage" is a "right." Then explain how the invention of a new type of "marriage" is a "right."

Then explain why a movement built around the stated objective of destroying marriage, which has changed its tactical objectives only recently, should be granted the new "right" it has invented without having to come clean on that movement's own "evolution."
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
This post of Moran's prompts me to re-post the following:

What we see with the comments of allegedly conservative commenters on this topic is a complete acceptance of the leftwing political agenda at its own face value:

a) From their unthinking acceptance of the term "gay"---a 19th century slang term applied to theatre people, drug addicts, prostitutes, practicing homosexuals, and other bohemians---being applied to the current incarnation of the homosexual-rights movement;

b) To their refusal to look at any aspect whatsoever of the history of that movement;

c) To their refusal to look at the current social effects of having granted that movement's past demands;

d) To their unthinking acceptance of that movement's current demands without any examination whatsoever;

e) To their taking of that movement's word as to the probable effects of granting its current demands;

We can see a complete and utter abdication of historical analysis, and of critical thinking about cause and effect, about the nature of "rights" as they exist under the Constitution, and about the difference between "rights" and "legalization. There is not even a whisper of intimation that they apprehend that these issues exist, let alone require thought, analysis, and discussion.

Instead we see merely a series of exhortations, in most cases in the crudest terms, that others follow their lead and cave to the movement's demands as presented.

I think that is intellectually shameful.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Can Rick Moran go two days wthout taking the left's side?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
How is his remark anti-gay? He's just saying that interest groups don't get to change the meaning of words. Why is "anti-gay" even in the title?

Homosexuality is a sin. Is that statement "anti-gay"?
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Mr. Moran: I do not know what you are thinking. This is deviant behavior and should not be given the term right or affirmative action status or extending marriage to these people that are 1% of the poplulation. It will not go well and it is like a gateway drug. The people asking for this extension of rights are asking for everyone to accept this as normal behavior. It is not. Just because they see deviant behavior as normal does not mean everyone else should have to accept that as normal or going forward. Getting called names because one can not go along with the deviant behavior is quite contrary to the norm in my opinion. Also as one of the other posters said: we are in a crisis situation in the economy, the immigration, the break down of law and order and many other issues. Giving this more press than it is due is just wrongheaded. I am a realist. This is not real. It is "feelings". When the people with all the 'feelings' don't get their way-right or wrong-they get all "hurt". I am hurt because the American people are getting kicked around like a bunch of step children on a bad day. Ben Carson is a man of priniciple. He comes forth as honest. He is not about hurting anyone. He just wants some sanity back as do I.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
"...the idea that adopting gay marriage will lead to legalizing pedophilia and bestiality are strawman arguments, refuted by the facts and somewhat ridiculous."

Why? If it's wrong to limit marriages to one man married to one woman, why isn't it wrong to limit marriages to a one man married to one man (or one woman to one woman)? Isn't it discriminatory to limit marriages to couples? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude children from marriage? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude farm animals from marriage? Isn't it discriminatory to exclude ANYONE or ANYTHING from marriage?

If it's NOT discriminatory to draw the line at only two individual adults, what is the basis for the limit?

"What judge or state legislature in their right mind is going to legalize pedophilia or bestiality? The argument is specious and insulting to boot."

No it's not. In fact, it's realistic. While pedophilia and bestiality may not be legalized at the same time as homosexual marriage, practitioners of those behaviors will simply go to court and demand equal treatment on the grounds that to do otherwise is to discriminate. And in the absence of any clear moral dividing line, they will win that case. They know this too.

When I lived in Canada in the 70s, they had a debate over allowing abortion. Many people were passionately against it since they felt it sanctioned infanticide. Eventually, the pro-abortion side was able to establish legilslation that allowed abortion "if necessary to save the life of the mother". Even this formulation was opposed by anti-abortionists but the politicians decided to go that way anyway. Before very long, they found that this bar was too high to allow for many abortions so the bar was lowered so that abortion was also allowed when it threatened the HEALTH of the mother. Then health was interpreted very broadly indeed to encompass mental health and the degree of harm was set so low that (apparently) even the discomfort of being pregnant was deemed damage to a mother's health and the Canadians effectively had abortion on demand.

I confidently predict that any loosening of the definition of marriage from the traditional one will very soon lead to the exact same sort of slippery slope regarding who can be deemed to be legally married. All it takes is an activist court and a few test cases and you'll see that same-sex marriage soon becomes a total free-for-all where any person or group can marry any other person or group. And that's just for starters. I won't be shocked to find that some will seek to marry animals or even things.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
It seems that the viciousness with which some gays relentlessly bedevil their perceived enemies has been absorbed by many in the media, including the author of this piece. Unless you're willing to abandon common sense, honesty, religious beliefs, objective observation or, as in the case of the late Hilton Kramer, principled art criticism you will be called a bigot. So what! The truth is the truth. Ben Carson is a breath of fresh air!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Rick - I mean absolutely no offense (and I am sorry if my comment offends anyone....does that remove the stigma of bigot from my comment?)..what will you call me (or those) who say that (and I am saying this only because of your picture) the way-overweight people should have restrictions on what they eat and how much, as they are going to cost a lot more to insure? Is that not the same principle? From overweight, to the infirm, to now post - born babies? So, Carson was right on with what he said....it will no longer matter if the person wants to marry an inanimate object, or a dog, or whatever, and it does not mean anyone is being rediculous about the meanings.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Here is some math for you. About 2% of the population is homosexual, 1% homosexual male.
Child abuse studies say between 15 and 25% of girls are sexually abused, and 5 to 15% of boys are sexually abused, although they believe just as many boys are molested as girls, but boys don't tell! Definition
homosexual pedophile





Web definitions




Pederasty or paederasty is a (usually erotic) relationship between an older man and an adolescent boy outside his immediate family. ....
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_pedophile

This is the definition that the homosexual activists will do anything to hide and change. They call a homosexual male who has homosexual sex with a 17 year,and 364 day old male a pedophile, when we all know he is a homosexual.

The math is that 15 of the population that is homosexual male, commits 5 to 15% of the sexual abuse of boys, while the other 19% of the male population that is heterosexual male ,commits 15 to 25% of the sexual abuse of girls.
Homosexual males are 78% more likely to be pedophiles than a heterosexual males.
Homosexuals will do anything to avoid this truth!
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
Should be 1% of the population that is homosexual male,commits 5 to !5% of the sexual abuse of males, while the 49% of the population that is heterosexual male, commits 15 to 25% of the sexual abuse of girls
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
What "possessed" Dr. Carson to say what he said? Maybe because what he said about marriage being between a man and a woman is the truth!

And no opinion of yours, Mr. Moran, or anyone else's, will change the truth.
1 year ago
1 year ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All