A Funkaoshi Production

• Recent Comments
• Here:
  • About,
  • Archive,
  • Contact.
• Elsewhere:
  • Flickr,
  • Pinboard,
  • Mastodon,
  • Photoblog,
  • I'll iPhone You,
  • Film Spool,
  • WTF TORY,
  • Save vs. Total Party Kill

Comments

1. There is some question as to whether or not this piece was intended to be somewhat tongue in cheek. Keillor has long been kind to homosexual characters in his monologues and on his show. He has been unabashedly left-leaning. I find it very hard to believe that this piece was meant to be taken in the way that it has been by many. Frankly, Keillor has long been one of my only idols, someone who has shown compassion toward his fellow humans, regardless of their ways of life. He gets a shitload of pro-conservative hatemail. I think that with 30 years of liberal radio history under his belt, he at least deserves the opportunity to clarify, or to be reread with a mind toward the possibility that he was satirizing the viewpoint that so many believe he was espousing.

   Honestly, the vitriol of this post is sad.

   by Ben on March 20 2007, 6:14 pm   #

2. Having read through to the end of that piece, I am more convinced than ever that it is incorrect. Is Keillor an attention seeking star? Has he ever been? It seems like this person hasn’t spent a great deal of time actually listening to A Prairie Home Companion or reading any of Keillor’s books or articles. This whole thing is very, very strange.

   by Ben on March 20 2007, 6:16 pm   #

3. Yeah, so, this issue really bothers me. I went out and found this:

   “I think that gay marriage is also an issue that does no good for us and I want to see us divest ourselves of this,” Keillor says. “The symbolism of gay people marrying is terribly potent, terrible powerful, and we ignore this at our peril in our party.

   “I think that gay marriage/union/benefits must be a state and city matter. Gays have tended to migrate from hostile places to friendlier places — San Francisco, New York, New Orleans — and this migration has been a boon to the friendlier places. Gay-friendly areas are the richer for it, in all sorts of ways. Tolerance has economic and cultural benefits. And so we can allow Missouri or South Carolina or South Dakota to be hostile to gay marriage and suffer the consequences.”

   So does he sound opposed to gay marriage? No. He says that it’s a divisive national issue, that it should be left as a local issue. That will make many people upset, certainly. On the other hand, he seems very open to localities sanctioning gay marriage. He praises diversity and the places in the United States where it exists. And in a sense, I think that he has a point. Because gay marriage has been pushed as a national issue, we face the risk that the right-wing lobbying groups will introduce and maybe someday pass legislation that makes it against federal law to marry someone of the same gender. The risk in pushing it nationally is great. Making it a local issue has less risk and perhaps more value.

   Again, a lot of people won’t like that, and that’s fine. But to say “Fuck Garrison Keillor” and to spew such hatred at him for a piece that is ambiguous and perhaps poorly written seems absurd. I dunno. Your mileage may vary.

   by Ben on March 20 2007, 6:25 pm   #

4. No doubt there is more to this than this simple blog post; I just liked the line, “Oh, tell me more about the old monogamous system, Uncle Garrison, you old serial adulterer you.” I actually didn’t realize he was a famous radio show host.

   by ramanan on March 20 2007, 11:16 pm   #

Don't be shy, you can comment too!