I don’t know who this guy is, but I like how he responds to the bullshit and ignorance.
One statement made by the female voice is this: “The government has no compelling interesting in promoting same sex marriage.”
But she started her diatribe by indicating that the government has 3 options concerning the behavior of its citizens.
She is laboring under the delusion that homosexuality is just a “behavior”, and people are apparently only gay when they are actually having sex. But think about that: are straight people only straight when they are actually having sex? Or are they straight all the time?
And she says the government has no compelling interesting in promoting same sex marriage, but then ignores the other options. Judge Walker’s court has already made it clear that the government has no compelling interest in prohibiting same-sex marriage, since the benefits of marriage (gay or straight) are virtually identical (stability, economic benefits, if children are involved it is better for kids to have a two-parent married home rather than single parenthood or serial in-and-out relationships, etc.), the only option is for the government to permit same-sex marriage and treat it under the law exactly the same as any other marriage.
The government is not promoting any particular kind of marriage; they let people pretty much define their own relationships. The only laws concerning restriction of marriage are things like: how long a couple has been in a state to qualify to be married in that state; the age of the parties (to ensure they are of legal age in their state); and that they are not already married to someone else. They allow 20-year-olds to marry 80-year-olds who are of a sane mind and otherwise qualified to marry. They allow celebrities and others to marry and divorce and remarry, over and over again. They allow convicted criminals to marry, including sex offenders. There is no compelling interest in prohibiting same-sex marriage. None. But this woman fails to mention that.
The logo at the bottom right corner is that of the National Organization for Marriage — but only for heterosexual, one-man/one-woman marriage, or what this woman is calling “natural marriage” (a not-so-subtle declaration that here is something unnatural about other types of marriage). This group (NOM) is unable to present a rational and unassailable argument against same sex marriage, and deliberate craft and tailor their messages to convince those unable to see their bullshit for what it is.