Gay Marriage

Heritage Foundation Fellow Defends His Bigotry: VIDEO

Ryan T. Anderson, a newly minted fellow at the Heritage Foundation, is making the rounds with the organization's latest attempt at explaining its opposition to marriage equality.

ImageAnderson, unlike some of Heritage's more high-profile ambassadors, has attempted at making a name for himself as a conservative who relies on logic as the basis for his discriminatory beliefs. As calm and collected as he may be in his explanations, however, his "legal" reasoning is somewhat suspect.

In a video that the Heritage Foundation posted to its website last week, Anderson laid out the thought process behind his assertion that legally married same sex couples should still be denied marriage's legal protections.

"The reason that you should not have the option of filing a joint tax return is that you can't get married, given what marriage is."

He explained to a married gay man during the speaking event at Stanford University. "You can be issued a marriage license in the state of California, but you can't actually get married. What you're asking us to do is to redefine marriage to include the adult relationship of your choice."

To recap: in Anderson's view, semantic disagreements about the definitions of marriage trump solid legal standing.

Watch Anderson demonstrate his peculiar "legal" acrobatics AFTER THE JUMP...


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. One of the tactics of a dirty sophist: Turn a real dispute into a verbal dispute, and short-circuit any hope of dialogue conducive to reinforcing equality.

    Posted by: WhateverHelpsYouSleepAtNight | Jul 29, 2014 8:13:43 PM

  2. Does anybody really care what these dinosaurs think anymore? Same-sex marriage and its equal benefits have started to take place around the world since the latter part of the last century. It's here to stay and the old conservatives have lost the battle, plain and simple.

    Posted by: David From Canada | Jul 29, 2014 8:28:39 PM

  3. Logic fail. Circulus in probando.

    Posted by: evan_la | Jul 29, 2014 8:30:01 PM

  4. As much as he tried to answer a question with another didn't work and WE know it didn't work. Unfortunately...Ryan's followers have guzzled from the same punchbowl therefore can't even hear how evasive his answer was. It's like being drunk and thinking for sure you can drive home. It's called a waste of time!

    Posted by: Paul B. | Jul 29, 2014 8:51:21 PM

  5. Yawn. Another closet case (note the curry gold necktie) pedaling as fast as he can further into the closet.

    Posted by: kdknyc | Jul 29, 2014 8:56:20 PM

  6. He's not married. And claims to be an expert on marriage. CLOSET CASE.

    Posted by: homer | Jul 29, 2014 9:01:51 PM

  7. When you've already lost the debate...this is what it looks can't "be married" because we won't call it "married". So there!
    Mommy, make him give me back my toys because they're not toys unless they're mine!

    Posted by: Johnnybegood | Jul 29, 2014 9:06:39 PM

  8. Okay, then I will just walk around this little prick and call it whatever the hell I want.

    Posted by: Tigernan | Jul 29, 2014 9:25:47 PM

  9. I'm sorry, I couldn't understand what he was saying. He should maybe remove the penis from his mouth.

    Posted by: The milkman | Jul 29, 2014 9:37:08 PM

  10. We should congratulate him on working backwards into a false syllogism. It's one of the dangers of trying to seem articulate when you are in fact a dumb bigot.

    Posted by: jason MacBride | Jul 29, 2014 9:47:18 PM

  11. Let's see: Roman Catholic, Princeton, Heritage Foundation. Probably an acolyte of Robert George at Princeton one of the Founders and ex-Chair of NOM. So this is the pretty young face of NOM. Could care less if he is gay or whatever - I am and have been happily legally married for 10 years whatever he may think!

    Posted by: Fr. Bill | Jul 29, 2014 9:55:57 PM

  12. Dear Snot nosed, adolescent, sophomoric brat:

    Grow up.

    Posted by: jmartindale | Jul 29, 2014 10:02:31 PM

  13. Dude. You don't get to define marriage. Legally married couples are legally married couples, and your tortured logic and obsession with throuples isn't going to change that. A lot of words to say nothing.

    Posted by: Ernie | Jul 29, 2014 10:08:10 PM

  14. What THE MILKMAN said!!!!!!

    Posted by: Hawthorne | Jul 29, 2014 10:13:39 PM

  15. Let's see, my family recognizes my marriage. My friends recognize my marriage. My employer and coworkers recognize my marriage. The state of California recognizes my marriage and the federal government recognizes my marriage is well. So I'm supposed to pay attention to this jerk and what he has to say because????

    Posted by: Howard B | Jul 29, 2014 10:14:54 PM

  16. FR. BILL

    Yes Anderson is one of George's minions. As is Robert Oscar Lopez and Sherif Girgis.

    This "grass roots" movement has always been a cabal of holy roller Catholics, fundies and Mormons centered around George.

    NOM, The Witherspoon Inst., Public Discourse, and half a dozen other sites and groups operating under different names are just shells for same handful of people who have essentially nothing worthwhile to do, but fixate on how the gays don't jibe with their own precious religious myths. It's the same group that birthed the Regnerus study and much of the anti-gay legislation that passed in the last decade. Some of the same people helping to stir the pot of anti-gay law making in Eastern Europe and in some areas of South America and Asia.

    Posted by: Leo88 | Jul 29, 2014 10:32:58 PM

  17. The questioner pinned him down very well by constantly returning to his original question when Anderson tried to manipulate the conversation. Anderson finally answered it, and you can understand why he tried to avoid doing so: his answer--"it's not a marriage"--is very weak. He pretty much said "I" don't think it's a marriage so it isn't. That's like a woman telling a child to do what she says "because I'm the mommy." Real good debating skills there, Ryan. You better go back for a few more lessons with George.
    Anderson would much rather have characterized the questioner as someone who wants "special rights" for himself but not for other unions society disapproves of, such as polygamy. The questioner didn't take the bait, politely forcing Anderson to answer the original question... very poorly.

    Posted by: woody | Jul 29, 2014 11:11:34 PM

  18. "You can be issued a marriage license in the state of California, but you can't actually get married. What you're asking us to do is to redefine marriage to include the adult relationship of your choice."

    How does this idiot's opinion on marriage overrule the state of California's right to grant marriage licenses?

    Last time I checked, I don't have to have permission from the Heritage Foundation to make a marriage legal.

    Posted by: Leonard | Jul 29, 2014 11:24:08 PM

  19. LEO88

    Thank you for confirming my assumptions.For some reason he and his bosses don't get that the definition of marriage is determined by civil law and not their religious doctrine or rules. The churches and other religious groups lost control of defining who can and cannot get married centuries ago. If I wanted his church to control who I can marry, I would join it. Happily I left it 50 years ago.

    Posted by: Fr. Bill | Jul 29, 2014 11:37:39 PM

  20. So now the've moved their reasoning from "Because the Bible says so" to "Just because".

    It's an improvement...I guess?

    Posted by: FuryOfFirestorm | Jul 30, 2014 12:15:18 AM

  21. HIS church won't let HIM marry the person of HIS choice. Too bad. It is a blissful state to be in.

    1 year and 28 days.

    Posted by: ben~andy | Jul 30, 2014 12:36:39 AM

  22. He is, simply, a demagogue!

    Posted by: Art Beeche | Jul 30, 2014 3:03:36 AM

  23. Poor little Catholic bigot boy. I think he protests a bit too loudly.

    Perhaps he needs a man in his bed tonight! Hmmm, 32 years old and not married. That's suspect right there. (He'd be cute if he weren't so messed up.)

    Posted by: TomR | Jul 30, 2014 6:52:03 AM

  24. So much money, time, and energy spent on fighting an issue that, win or lose, has no effect on them personally. You'd think christians would have better things to spend their time and money on like, oh say - helping the poor and needy like jebus told them to.

    Posted by: Chadd | Jul 30, 2014 7:18:10 AM

  25. Birds gotta fly, fish gotta swim, haters gotta hate.

    Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Jul 30, 2014 7:51:36 AM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Jessie J, Ariana Grande, Nicki Minaj - 'Bang Bang': VIDEO« «