Ben Carson's gay marriage thoughtcrime
Poor little Toure made a fool of himself calling Dr. Ben Carson an "Uncle Tom," and MSNBC in general has been going berserk trying to destroy him with racial attacks, but all they needed to do was wait until he committed gay marriage thoughtcrime. That happened on Sean Hannity's TV show, as chronicled by The Blaze:
“Marriage is between a man and a woman,” Carson said on “Hannity”. “It’s a well-established, fundamental pillar of society and 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.”
The forces of campus "tolerance" eagerly tugged on their jackboots and fell into formation, objecting to the choice of Carson as commencement speaker at Johns Hopkins:
Hopkins students took up a petition for a new speaker, citing Carson’s comments about gays; his National Prayer Breakfast speech that he used to “deride Obamacare, advocate lower taxes for the wealthy, and suggest that Christianity requires supporting Republican policies”; and his rejection of evolution.
“We retain the highest respect for Dr. Carson’s achievements and value his right to publicly voice political views. Nevertheless, we feel that these expressed values are incongruous with the values of Johns Hopkins and deeply offensive to a large proportion our student body,” members of the Health and Human Rights Student Group said Thursday.
They'll never get over Carson's slight against Dear Leader at the National Prayer Breakfast, will they? Speaking of which, Obama was against gay marriage until a few months ago, and he routinely "suggests that Christianity requires supporting Democrat policies," especially through his well-worn sermons about Christ the Tax Collector. Is Barack Obama also unsuitable as a commencement speaker?
Carson has apologized for offending anyone, and offered to step aside as commencement speaker if that's what the students want, because "this is their day and the last thing I would want to do is rain on their parade."
He's explained that his purpose was to illustrate the slippery slope that begins once marriage is re-defined, not compare homosexuality to pedophilia or bestiality. But that's clear enough from his original remarks. We're back to parsing plain English and diagramming simple sentences in a futile attempt to mollify those who are determined to take offense. Carson made the fatal mistake of bringing incendiary concepts within close proximity of the gay marriage powder keg, resulting in an ideological detonation that obscured the simple, and in fact irrefutable, point he was trying to make. The polygamists will be along in a couple of years to prove how right he is, but that won't do him much good.
Carson could have made his point without going to absurd extremes. One integral concept that will survive the gay marriage transformation, but will not hinder polygamists when it's their turn to re-define marriage, is the requirement that all participants must be consenting adult human beings. Arguments may ensue about matters such as the precise age of consent, but I doubt Americans are going to drop the concept, and accepting same-sex marriage doesn't require them to do so.
However, every single slogan employed by same-sex marriage advocates - "We just want marriage equality! Society has no right to tell me who I can love! We reject arbitrary limits on who can get married!" - will be readily available to polygamists. Their obstacles are entirely political, not logical or legal: they have nothing approaching the level of media influence same-sex marriage advocates enjoy, there aren't as many polygamists, and pop culture tends to regard polygamists as unappealing religious extremists.
Carson should have stopped there. He didn't need to risk offense and outrage to make a reasonable point. For all his brilliance and accomplishments, he's new to the rough-and-tumble world of our politicized media battlefield, and he made a grave rookie mistake.