By Isabel M. Estrada Portales, Ph.D., M.S.
As a character in one of my friend’s Mara Jiménez’s stories would have it, a certain level of ignorance or stupidity is lascivious. By the same token, there is a degree of vulgar manipulation that is not just immoral, but should be illegal…or at the very least come with the weed one would need to process it.
Gene Schaerr, attorney of Utah’s ban on marriage-equality’s fame, wrote in The Daily Signal, that beacon of truth and clarity belonging to The Heritage Foundation, that forcing states to recognize gay marriage could increase abortions. I, in my humble ignorance, never read this blog, but was alerted to this piece through Raw Story.
Due to my obsession with source-checking – a professional malformation – and how dumb the idea sounded, I dutifully stopped laughing and clicked on the original article, to make sure the Raw Story didn’t make things any more ridiculous than they already were. Difficult, I know.
And there it was plain as day. Why would anybody be surprised The Onion can’t catch a break? It is rather hard to compete with the actual news these days.
Schaerr says that “on the surface, abortion and same-sex marriage may seem unrelated.” Yes, only on the surface, though, because now that even people in the most conservative states are getting around to realize that someone else’s marriage is none of their business and that gay people may even be people with, oh, God, no!, rights, we have to make sure that they look way below the surface and see the clear line between two men getting married and the subsequent onslaught of abortions.
If same-sex marriage won’t get them out, abortion should would!
In a nutshell: A reduction in the opposite-sex marriage rate means an increase in the percentage of women who are unmarried and who, according to all available data, have much higher abortion rates than married women. And based on past experience, institutionalizing same-sex marriage poses an enormous risk of reduced opposite-sex marriage rates.
DO NOTICE THE QUOTATION MARKS. He really wrote that.
Besides the obvious problem of “institutionalizing same-sex marriage” and forcing all of us to marry people of our own gender…oh, no, that’s not what that means, is it?
Well, besides how somehow “institutionalizing same-sex marriage” becomes a problem – something, mind you, he failed at defending on the Supreme Court – there is then the other problem of “reduced opposite-sex marriage rates.”
As Dana Milbank put it, the last-ditch argument is clear: Gay marriage kills. He is not exaggerating one bit, according to Schaerr gay marriage and abortion “are closely linked in a short and simple causal chain.”
Schaerr’s arguments include that because unmarried women have more abortion than married ones, and same-sex marriage would lead to more unmarried women…well, again, plain as day: more abortions – 900,000 more to be exact.
Because somehow the fact that we are not getting married at the same rates as before is a direct consequence of gays getting married and not, say, of the fact that we can cohabitate just fine, thank you; the economy sucks and weddings are expensive; we do not believe in the nonsensical things he believes in; etc.
We know the number of people – you know, the straight, normal kind of people…not very moral, but at least not LGBT people – who decide to live together as couples, have children, raise them, go to PTA meetings, spend money in summer camps are growing, exponentially.
But, again, as soon as same-sex marriage is “institutionalized,” those cohabitating types will be legions and they will have more abortions for sure. So, same-sex marriage causes abortion. Right there.
I’m sure it was just an oversight and he is tripping all over himself right now to submit the corrected version of his piece in which he includes things such as the increased number of adoptions in general and of adoptions of children with disabilities, of children who would otherwise be vegetating in our marvelous foster care system, of black and brown children, of children of pregnant women who want to have an abortion but are too late or are dissuaded by seeing the possibility of a good adoption for her future child. Same-sex couples adopt those children.
Lastly, I’m sure he would also appreciate the irony of being against people who want to sustain such a decadent, patriarchal and discriminatory institution such as marriage.
I am a dead set in favor of same-sex marriage because equality is equality is equality. As soon as we get that done, I’ll start campaigning against it along with the heterosexual kind.
Do read…it’s very funny