Oh, dear. This is one of those cases where you see a wingnut talking/writing, and you almost (almost) feel sorry for them. Suze Orman is obviously a wonderful, accomplished, brilliant woman, and she obviously loves her wife. But yet, here is a wingnut named Judy Meissner who thinks she actually has something to say to Suze Orman about her “lifestyle choice.” Like I said, I almost feel sorry for poor Judy.
Suze Orman Supports ‘Marriage Equality’? Get Real, Suze!
By Judy Meissner
Suze Orman, you are too smart to declare with a completely straight face that you “are not treated equally” because you cannot marry a person of your same sex.
Inequality means not being permitted something another citizen is permitted under the same, equal terms and conditions.
Suze, you can marry anyone under the same, equal terms and conditions as every other American. no one in America is allowed to marry under different, unequal terms and conditions as you seek, incredibly, in the name of “equality.” What you are proposing, Suze, is not “marriage equality,” but marriage inequality!
No one in America is ever asked their alleged sexual preference, their alleged sexual behavior or their alleged sexual practices when they apply for a marriage license. No one! Everyone in America can marry under the same terms and conditions as everyone else. So deal with it, Suze. Do not attempt to insult our intelligence, or yours, for that matter.
No, it’s kind of assumed that the couple in question has already crossed the bridge of “are we sexually attracted to each other?” And Judy, when we use a grown-up understanding of sexuality, and a grown-up acceptance of reality, we understand that a heterosexual person should naturally marry someone of the opposite sex, while a homosexual person should marry someone of the same sex. Anything else would be cruel both to the person marrying against their natural sexual orientation and to the spouse who has to endure a marriage where their partner really doesn’t want to have sex with them, ever. Unless Judy is okay with the idea of her husband, if she has one, secretly lusting after men. I mean, it’s God’s plan, right, Judy?
Stop me if this grown-up talk gets too complicated.
Now, if you want to talk about “Marriage Equality,” that true equality applies equally to everyone! It cannot be granted to a privileged few, but unequally denied to everyone else. It’s hypocritical to demand “Marriage Equality” for aberrosexuals (those who engage in biologically aberrant sexual behavior), yet cynically deny it to all others that, by the same logic, are as equally deserving.
Haha, ole Judy made up a word! Actually, in states with marriage equality, straight people are equally able to marry a person of the same sex, if they so choose. Don’t know why they would…
But yes, “marriage equality” gives people the right to consensually marry the person they love, regardless of what kind of genitals they have. Judy’s worried about the genitals, though, I can see.
Aberrosexualists (partisans, whether aberrosexual or not, of the extremist ideology pushing for the “normalization” of biologically aberrant sexual behavior) mock the very notion of equality by demanding “equal marriage rights” for themselves while conveniently refusing it to everyone else in a “loving and caring relationship.” What about those who want to so-call “marry” their blood relatives, minors, multiple partners, or even their lovable, adorable pets? That’s right, Suze! If you can leave your entire estate to your beautiful Labrador retriever, why shouldn’t you be able to marry him (or her?) as well? Shouldn’t “Marriage Equality” apply to these Americans as well?
This is one of the stupidest wingnut articles I have ever read. Porno Pete posted this on his blog, so he obviously doesn’t see how stupid it is, but then again, Porno Pete admires Chuck Norris, who is pretty much the butt of his own joke these days. Porno Pete ‘n’ Judy also don’t seem to understand the concept of consensual marriage, which tells us more about them than it does about LGBT people. If you’re really worried that marriage equality will lead to people marrying their cats, you’ve got, um, issues.
Aberrosexualist extremists pushing so-called “Marriage Equality” need to come clean. They need to be consistent at the very least! They can’t advocate “Marriage Equality” for a chosen few, while hypocritically denying it to those who may want to ”marry” (so-called) multiple partners or their grandma so they can be covered by her insurance or inherit her great pension benefits. Otherwise, they must stop pretending to stand for “Marriage Equality” at all!
Judy, you go ahead and start that fight. It’s obviously close to your heart. One more time, though, for the slow: grown-ups understand that scientists and mental health researchers acknowledge that a person’s sexual orientation determines what kind of person they’re going to fall in love with and want to marry. Heterosexuality, homosexuality and bisexuality are classified as sexual orientations. Incest, polygamy, pedophilia and bestiality are not, and they never will be, no matter how stupidly a wingnut reads the medical and psychological literature.
Americans in all 50 states already enjoy “Marriage Equality.” Regardless of their alleged sexual preference, everyone in America has the right to marry a member of the opposite sex on the same equal terms and equal conditions. That’s what true marriage equality is all about: an equality that equals reality.
I agree about supporting an equality that equals reality. Judy, unfortunately, has apparently never been to “reality.”
In summary, Suze Orman still has the upper hand here, has a lot of great advice that we’d all do well to follow, on a lot of issues, and Judy just made a fool of herself.
