"... these wingnuts claimed that legalizing same-sex marriage did no injury to heterosexual couples ... But they were and are dead wrong." [tongue in cheek!]

...................................................................................................................................................................
COMMENTS: 
*  The whole time I'm reading this, I'm thinking "This can't be serious." And then, I got to the end. Good show, old bean. Unfortunately, Poe's law is at work here, and all you have to do is go over to CNS and see that this "satire" is very much a reality for them.
*  This is satire? I thought this was the script to the next Fox Noise rant.
*  I am glad you posted that it is satire because you sure as hell wrote like those who oppose gay marriage legality...
*  Holy shit, this had me hook line and sinker. It's especially tricky because some actually think this way.
*  Why is it so hard for christians not to hate?
*  The problem with this piece is that it's too close to what many actually believe for people to see right away it's satire. That's the scary part.
...................................................................................................................................................................
The Supreme Court Has Just Destroyed Marriage
By James Heffernan, June 26, 2015

Today, June 26, 2015, a day that will live in infamy, the Supreme Court has just destroyed the great battleship of marriage. Sent a kamizake pilot right through its bridge. Blown it to smithereens.

A sacred institution that was founded by God Himself in the Garden of Eden and that has lasted for countless millennia, an institution that has persevered through fire and flood and earthquake and famine and tyranny and Nazism and Fascism and Communism and even terrorism, has just been wantonly wrecked. Like the ancient temples and icons of Syria and Iraq that have lately been smashed by the terrorists of ISIS, the institution of marriage now lies in ruins.

The Court has thus finished the wrecking job it began just over two years ago, when it recklessly overturned DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. Until that happened, my wife and I (one woman and one man) had been planning to mark our Golden Anniversary with a blowout party for 600 of our closest friends plus our two children and their families from Brooklyn and LA. But the Court's decision killed our plans. How could we celebrate our Golden Anniversary when the Supreme Court of these United States had just made a mockery of marriage itself?

This sort of question never dented the brains of those who argued that same-sex couples must be allowed to marry throughout the land. Instead, these wingnuts claimed that legalizing same-sex marriage did no injury to heterosexual couples, that it didn't hurt us in any way. But they were and are dead wrong. Two years ago, when the Court overturned DOMA, my wife and I suffered pain. Deep pain. Heartbreak. Besides cancelling our Golden Anniversary party, we had to put all future anniversary celebrations on hold until the Court ruled, finally, on whether traditional marriage could survive in any state of this land. But today brought the final blow to our hopes. From here on, we must live apart and mark each anniversary only by separately mourning the death of marriage itself. Not just our marriage, but all marriages.

An I over-reacting here? Not a bit. Let me explain.

You may wonder how a decision to legalize same-sex marriage throughout the land could kill any institution that has somehow withstood a divorce rate of nearly 50 percent. Now it's true that Christ emphatically forbade divorce -- "What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder" (Mark 10:9) - and that divorce can be very damaging to children as well as to the men and women who go through it. But miraculously enough, divorce does no harm at all to the institution of marriage, which is why it has long been allowed by all Christian sects including the Catholic church. (The Catholic church nominally forbids divorce but routinely allows "annulments" -- even of marriages that have lasted many years and produced several children.) So while only about half of all married couples stay together for life, as marriage vows traditionally require, the breakup of their unions does no harm at all to the stability of marriage itself. It's strictly a matter of numbers. While a divorce rate of 50 percent leaves the institution perfectly intact, a gay marriage rate of as little as 5 percent can destroy it, and now will destroy it. That's how insidious gay marriage is.

Equally insidious is the argument that gays deserve equality. Two years ago, Justice Anthony Kennedy struck down DOMA because, he wrote, it denied "the equal liberty of persons that is protected by the Fifth Amendment." But gays are no more equal to straights than righteously homophobic conservatives are to leftist nuts. For that reason, gay "marriage" will never equal traditional marriage.

Today's decision puts us on a bullet train to chaos. The next thing you know, dogs will be legally allowed to marry cats, mice to marry rats, and -- worst of all -- Democrats to marry Republicans. (Any theologian worth her salt will tell you that the so-called "marriage" of James Carville and Mary Matalin violates natural law as well as the laws of God.)

And please don't ask me to cheer for Jim Obergefell, who brought this case to the Supreme Court because in Ohio, where same sex has been illegal up to now, he wanted to be named as the surviving spouse on the death certificate of his late husband, John Arthur. I don't cheer for Jim Obergefell any more than I cheered for Edith Windsor, who brought the case against DOMA because she would otherwise have had to pay $363,053 in estate taxes on what she inherited from her same-sex spouse. I don't cheer--and didn't cheer--for Windsor because that figure is far less than my wife and I will now have to pay to reconstruct our house.

Since our marriage--like all marriages-- has just been destroyed, we can no longer live together. But since neither of us can bear to leave the house that we have shared for the past forty years, we will have to build a brick wall right down the middle of it. Just to get permission for this arrangement in our neighborhood will cost us -- in legal fees -- at least fifty grand. Then the house itself must be reconfigured. On her side of the new wall, my wife will need a new Jacuzzi, a new kitchen, and a new living room; on my side I'll need a new exercise room, a new dining room, and a new stairway. Since no builder we know has ever done this kind of job before, we've so far had only ballpark estimates starting at 1.3 million.

And guess how far we'd get if we took our case to the Supreme Court.

If you hadn't guessed by now, this post is satire.
 ...................................................................................................................................................................