Obsolete Language

19 May

When you want a sense of how rapidly things change, it helps to read the New York Times. Especially the times of over 40 years ago, when titles like “Miss” were used. The Times will no longer use the title “Mrs.” to refer to women, even married ones.

More interesting is this story in the paper about the first homosexual “marriage,” undertaken in 1971. Some cherce tidbits:

In 2013, when the Minnesota Legislature authorized same-sex marriage and a state senator announced, “Today, love wins,” Mr. McConnell watched, enthralled, from the gallery. But the couple did not join the rush for an undisputed license.

“No,” Mr. Baker said, pounding an oak table in their living room. “To reapply now becomes an admission that what we did was not legal, and I will never admit that.”

Hmmm. What did they do that might not have been “legal?”

Mr. Baker, meanwhile, had devised a roundabout way to get married. First, Mr. McConnell legally adopted him, which gave them inheritance and other legal protections. At the same time, Mr. Baker changed his name to the gender-neutral Pat Lyn McConnell, though he continued as Jack Baker in public.

They went to stay with friends in Blue Earth County, to the southwest, where Mr. McConnell applied for and received a marriage license from an unsuspecting clerk, who did not know about the legal adoption. They wed on Sept. 3, 1971, in Minneapolis.

So, to get this straight. (Oh, wait, we CERTAINLY don’t want to do that…) Mr. McConnell married his own legally adopted child?

But leave that by the wayside. Peer through a lens at what people without the threat of retribution said and did over 40 years ago.

When they presented their challenge to the Minnesota Supreme Court, one of the justices turned his chair around in contempt. The court declared, “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the Book of Genesis.”

In 1970, after the publicity about the couple’s marriage application, the University of Minnesota regents rescinded Mr. McConnell’s job offer. …

Devastated, he sued in federal court but ultimately lost; the appeals court admonished him for trying to “foist tacit approval of this socially repugnant concept upon his employer.”

In Look magazine’s Jan. 26, 1971, issue on “The American Family,” they were featured as “The Homosexual Couple.”
“Some homosexuals — a minority — live together in stable, often long-lasting relationships, like Baker’s and McConnell’s,” the article said.

Yeah, that is completely changed now. “79% of homosexual men say over half of sex partners are strangers…”

I never thought I would miss the 70s, or consider 1971 to be a time of sanity.


Posted by on May 19, 2015 in Uncategorized


28 responses to “Obsolete Language

  1. Will S.

    May 19, 2015 at 6:03 pm

    They weren’t content to just live in sin; they had to go and compound it, by making it worse: turning it from an immoral and non-legally-recognized relationship to one of incest via adoption!

    Once again, revealing of the mindset of such ‘pioneers’…

  2. Will S.

    May 19, 2015 at 7:39 pm

    Re: your larger point, indeed; that the ’70s now seem like a sane era, is telling.

    And how insane, that the NYT will not refer to a married woman by ‘Mrs.’. As if most married women weren’t still fine with being called ‘Mrs.’

  3. infowarrior1

    May 20, 2015 at 4:35 am

    Fire and Brimstone may be coming soon.

  4. Mark Citadel

    May 20, 2015 at 5:49 am

    @infowarrior1 – in one way or another, yes

  5. Eric

    May 20, 2015 at 3:03 pm

    I don’t think the 1970s were necessarily a saner era, what we saw then were the seeds of the cultural rot being planted that we’re harvesting today.

  6. Eric

    May 20, 2015 at 3:12 pm

    To clarify that point, weigh the Look magazine article’s latent Liberal Progressivism against the judges decision, which was representative of the era that was passing away. It wasn’t but a few years later that the media was foisting approval of homosexuality onto the public.

  7. Eric

    May 21, 2015 at 2:27 pm

    Speaking of Obsolete Language:

    The head of the Boy Scouts has concluded that banning fags is not sustainable and hopes to broaden that organization by including atheists.

    Not to be outdone, the Girl Scouts rose up to defend their new Transgender Inclusion Policy.

  8. Will S.

    May 21, 2015 at 4:34 pm

    Reactionary parents shouldn’t enrol their kids in scouting any more, anyways; the movement started going off the rails years ago…

  9. electricangel

    May 21, 2015 at 4:44 pm


    Yes, in some sense it looked like the 80s would undo some of the crazier stuff of the 70s. Abortion was not repealed, and we got a war on drugs, and a war on deadbeat dads, and a higher drinking age, and a whole host of “conservative” things that did NOTHING to remove the rot. The rot, however,set in long before the 70s, or even the 60s. I still had a few people teaching me back in the 70s who recalled the era before World War 1, and what america was like when the only contact most people would have with the Federal Government was through the post office.

    We are now in complete nervous breakdown at a national level. Soon enough, a politician will stand up and say, as Andrew Jackson once did: “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!” Once people see that there is no enforcement coming, this state will collapse like East Germany in 1989. I can still hardly believe what happened in 1989.

  10. electricangel

    May 21, 2015 at 4:47 pm

    @Will, @Eric,

    Tithing your precious children to the state, or now the scouts, is a bad idea. I recall reading once about the change in parts of the Islamic world: once, the Mosque was reactionary, backward, and the governments were modern, Western, progressive. Now, the Islamists had captured the state and gone full repressive, and the freest place left was the Mosque. So, I think, in the USA: things that fall within the bounds of the church will remain free, and nothing outside it will be so.

  11. Will S.

    May 21, 2015 at 4:55 pm

    EA, I don’t know about the Catholic church, you and Eric would know better than me, but in the Dutch Reformed world, there is a Scouting equivalent:

    I know other trad Christians have similar things – I was at an Egyptian Coptic Orthodox church recently, and they seemed to have a similar program for their youth; I came across a Korean Presbyterian country campground in some urban forest, with cabins, so it looked like they too were doing something similar – so if Catholics haven’t started a Scouting alternative already, maybe now is time to start one! 🙂

  12. infowarrior1

    May 22, 2015 at 1:15 am


    You can have your children confiscated by the government if government dictates are not obeyed:

  13. infowarrior1

    May 22, 2015 at 1:19 am

    @Will S.

    I hope they are actually making masculine men mentors rather than effeminate pansies which churchianity seemed to be plagued with as well as faux-macho men like Mark Driscoll who pander to women.

  14. Will S.

    May 22, 2015 at 5:54 am

    I hope so too, infowarrior1.

  15. Eric

    May 23, 2015 at 1:43 pm

    Sadly, fag-marriage seems to be in Ireland’s future:

    And notice how the big corporations teamed up with the Progs in an alliance against the Church. Again showing that the Cultural Marxists and vested financial interests really work for the same ends.

    The Russian reported not long ago that the Obama Administration was funneling covert aid to the referendum.

  16. Eric

    May 23, 2015 at 6:47 pm

    Speaking of the Russians, they took a positive stand for families:

    “A bill before the Russian Duma would include a ban on transgender marriages to supplement the current ban on gay marriages…according to the authors of this bill, the natural sex of a human being remains inalienable…therefore a transgender marriage is a variation of homosexual marriage currently banned under Russian law.”

  17. Will S.

    May 23, 2015 at 7:21 pm

    Alas, the ‘yes’ side did win in Ireland:

    Yes, not surprising Big Business were in favour, as they have been over on this side of the pond.

    Good for the Russians!

  18. Will S.

    May 23, 2015 at 7:24 pm

    And as with the rainbow over Toronto after its gay pride parade, progs are taking the rainbow over Dublin as a sign from God:

    When a rainbow is a sign of a very different thing, a covenant God made with Noah, agreeing not to destroy the world again. The progs are lucky – for now… They have time to either repent – or increase their condemnation all the more, by refusing to do so…

  19. ray

    May 23, 2015 at 11:42 pm

    A double rainbow, actually. In Scripture, doubling often involves judgment, particularly of ‘babylon’.

    Not to fret however…. the Almighty People have spoken!


  20. ray

    May 24, 2015 at 12:07 am

    oops I see the irish vote already was covered.

    But p.s. anyway — I suggest the vertical word TOYMASTER might be relevant here. Likewise, is that an Irish ‘do not enter’ sign at frame-center? Also can someone identify the green spired building in the background pls.


  21. Mark Citadel

    May 24, 2015 at 5:40 am

    I remain sensibly skeptical about Russia’s ability to tackle its internal problems, or at least to do it within a quick enough time frame. There seems to be a lack of boldness, even among good people.

    Regardless, the more Western Europe sinks into utter degeneracy, the more I hope to see a Russian conquest of the dead continent before the end of the century. Will the Irish take it as a sign from good when the roar of jets fills their skies rather than the rainbow? I wonder.

    Was it not a good thing when the Babylonians, foreigners, punished Israel for their disobedience to God, sacked their cities, and took their people into captivity? Was this not a great justice engineered by the Lord God? Of course it was, and so must He pour wrath out upon the nations that once were Christendom, and are now in the service of satan. Whether these foreigners come in the form of the sword of the Islamic State, or the tank barrels of a resurgent Holy Rus, do not weep for our enemies. In the words of the great Catholic thinker, Felix Sarda y Salvany:

    “All those who, in our times claim the title of Liberalism, in the specific sense in which we always use the term, become our declared enemies and the enemies of the Church of God.”

    I am utterly disgusted by the Irish nation, and the treacherous clergy there who have beclowned themselves with much unchallenged heresy. They dig their own grave.

  22. Will S.

    May 24, 2015 at 8:20 am

    @ ray: Never been to Dublin, don’t know what dome that is; sorry.

    But, Googling, it might be the dome of a church called or at a place called Rathmines, whatever that is.

    Yes, that is a ‘do not enter’ sign.

    @ Mark: It is dismaying…

  23. Eric

    May 24, 2015 at 10:00 pm

    Right on cue, the media scumbags are trying to spin the Irish vote as a Catholic revolt against the Church:

    The fact is that the Progs intentionally targeted Ireland because the influence of the Church—especially among the young—has been declining for some time. But the outside world perceives Ireland as the bastion of Catholicism it once was. The propaganda value of this for the Progs was enormous.

    I predict too that Ireland will see strong anti-Catholic persecution in the near future, with the Progs using this a backdrop to ethnically cleanse their foes, and do it under the guise that mainstream Catholics are ‘in revolt’.

  24. Will S.

    May 24, 2015 at 10:09 pm

    That wouldn’t surprise me; I do think battles there will be fierce, on a host of issues.

  25. Eric

    May 24, 2015 at 10:40 pm

    Ugh…this story is just disgusting:–abc-news-topstories.html

    This has got to be Obama’s nadir in the Kulturkampf. The fact that Kindergarten-age children are praising fag marriage is bad enough; but Obama shows that he’s morally degenerated to the point where he’s not even ashamed of it.

    I’ll bet if 15 y/o girl wrote him and asked him why she can’t marry her 30 y/o boyfriend if there’s marriage equality; that would have a lot different response.

  26. Will S.

    May 24, 2015 at 10:42 pm

    Child abuse!


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s