HomosexualityTue Sep 11, 2012 - 5:28 pm EST
‘The Notebook’ director says if we back gay marriage, why not incest?
HOLLYWOOD, September 11, 2012, (LifeSiteNews.com) – Defenders of marriage have long said if the institution is redefined beyond one man and one woman, there is no clear end to the new combinations that could be considered “marriage.” A growing body of evidence shows the popular culture, led by Hollywood elites, do not intend to stop with same-sex unions.
Nick Cassavetes, the director of the romantic film The Notebook, told reporters at the debut of his new film that incest is no different than allowing same-sex weddings.
“Love who you want, isn’t that what we say? Gay marriage – love who you want,” he said.
“If you’re not having kids, who gives a damn?” the son of legendary director John Cassavetes and actress Gena Rowlands asked in an interview with The Wrap while premiering his new film, Yellow, which features an incestuous affair between a brother and sister. “If it’s your brother or sister it’s super-weird, but if you look at it, you’re not hurting anybody except every single person who freaks out because you’re in love with one another.”
Click “like” if you want to defend true marriage.
Meanwhile, a celebrity gossip rag has become the latest publication to support polygamy and polyandry.
In a column entitled “Three Shouldn’t be a Crowd,” the digital tabloid The Frisky stated, “Polygamy and polyamory get a bad rap.”
Carrie Nelson wrote, “Opening marriages and expanding what makes a marriage…may well end up saving relationships and the institution as a whole.”
“Believe me, I’m not some undercover agent trying to bring down the institution of marriage from within. If anything, I feel so strongly about marriage equality including polygamy because I love marriage,” Nelson said.
The call for broadening the number of people in a marriage has intensified since a judge in Sao Paolo, Brazil, registered a three-person “stable union” last month.
The decision led UK Guardian writer Jean Hannah Edelstein to ask, “If three, or four, or 17 people want to marry each other simultaneously and equally, why should they not be granted the same status as two people who want to become a legal family?” Banning such an arrangement would be “a bit illiberal,” she said.
The publicity does not surprise Austin Nimocks of the Alliance Defending Freedom. He told NPR in May that if marriage is “about adults and not the kids that flow from procreative relationships, then from a policy standpoint you have to ask the question, then why can’t three or more adults be just as loving and committed to each other?”
As the skeptical host listened, Nimocks said, “If it’s about the procreative relationships that produced and raised the next generation and we keep it a child-centered institution, then the risk of polygamy and plural marriage does not exist.”
View CommentsClick to view or comment.