Guest Blogger: Gay Marriage - For the Umpteenth Time, People!
The following was not written by me....I only wish it had been! It's originator is the Loquacious Curmudgeon. His blog is a definitely worth visiting!
And now...our Guest Blogger:
The proceeding comment was in response to some brain trust posting at joeuser.com in an article entitled "This Ain't Montgomery and YOU Ain't Rosa Parks!", in which he divorces gay rights from civil rights. One comment, in specific, let loose with the whole "parading your sexuality in my face" argument that is so tiresome. I bet he has Playboy calendars all over his apartment, too. The basic theme of the comment threat seemed to be this: gay rights is not civil rights, and "faggots" don't have the right to marry, to which I simply had to reply. The line of argument seemed to be that gay marriage advocates only care about their own interests, not about anyone else's.
(edited for spelling...)
Parading it in your face? You live in an interesting neighborhood. Or perhaps you mean parading in the sense of wearing wedding rings, having naked women mud flaps, and putting pictures of your spouse and children up everywhere.
Let's attack the straw man of the gay rights activist who doesn't care about anyone else's rights. I'm a gay activist and I definitely care. I also feel that any relationship that is contractually standardized by the government should follow a policy of extending that freedom to any adult, regardless of race, financial status, creed, gender and any other social class status. So not all activists or gay marriage supporters are the same. I also fully support any church's right to NOT recognize same sex marriage within the church.
Most gay people don't choose to be gay. There is hoards of evidence supporting this claim, and you all can whine about it as much as you want, but it doesn't change the facts. While we don't know specfically that there is a "gay gene", most agree that the propensity toward homosexuality isn't a conscious choice; the decision (if decision it is) is made in the depths of the psyche, not while browsing a menu of lifestyle options. Yes, the gay community owes a great deal of debt to human rights pioneers such as Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr. and the myriad of others who came before us. That doesn't mean the push for gay rights isn't civil rights, simply because someone else was there first.
Civil rights is a movement among any group to resolve disenfranchisement from constitutionally guaranteed rights. This can occur among a racial minority, a gender majority, a religious group, and even those of an alternate sexual orientation.
Let's look at a brief history of the gay rights movement, shall we? The modern gay rights movement started when a bunch of police raided the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village: a gay bar. This was the straw the broke the camel's back. After years of enforced hatred and stupidity being put into law (Eisenhower making it illegal for any homosexual to hold down a federal job in the 50's, for example), people - gay people - had had enough. Gays fought back, there was a riot, and the aftermath lead to the modern movement for gay rights. It was heterosexuals who started it. At that point, there were no pride parades, no Queer as Folk on televison. Homosexuals did what you would still like them to do: they skulked along in the background, hiding themselves from the rest of the world. But the rest of the world wouldn't let us be.
The recent striking down of sodomy laws across the nation was based on a landmark case where a gay couple was having sex in the privacy of their own home, when police burst in and then arrested them for sodomy. It was the police who started it.
As soon as policy makers in this country began creating laws that treated homosexuals differently than other citizens, they created a social minority defined by sexual orientation. So bleat and blather about it all you want. Every time you claim that gays are this way or gays are that way, you strengthen the boundary lines and the perceptions that lead to minority status.
Personally, I'm for marriage being defined in two ways: as a social contract and as a religious contract. The Constitution is set up so that the government shouldn't interefere in the latter, but has no right to pick and choose to whom they may extend the former. Like it or don't like it, I don't much care. If you're arguing against gay marriage because your undies are all in a twist that gay people have the audacity to think they're a minority status, stop treating them that way and the division will go away and you'll be right. If you're arguing from a moral perspective, read some Jefferson, read the Constitution and then get over yourself. If you're arguing from a perspective of religious belief, get to a church and lock the doors, then practice whatever beliefs you see fit. If you're one of those nut jobs who thinks that the sanctity of one's own marriage will be defined by what legal rights I may or may not have, see a therapist. Seriously.
And now...our Guest Blogger:
The proceeding comment was in response to some brain trust posting at joeuser.com in an article entitled "This Ain't Montgomery and YOU Ain't Rosa Parks!", in which he divorces gay rights from civil rights. One comment, in specific, let loose with the whole "parading your sexuality in my face" argument that is so tiresome. I bet he has Playboy calendars all over his apartment, too. The basic theme of the comment threat seemed to be this: gay rights is not civil rights, and "faggots" don't have the right to marry, to which I simply had to reply. The line of argument seemed to be that gay marriage advocates only care about their own interests, not about anyone else's.
(edited for spelling...)
Parading it in your face? You live in an interesting neighborhood. Or perhaps you mean parading in the sense of wearing wedding rings, having naked women mud flaps, and putting pictures of your spouse and children up everywhere.
Let's attack the straw man of the gay rights activist who doesn't care about anyone else's rights. I'm a gay activist and I definitely care. I also feel that any relationship that is contractually standardized by the government should follow a policy of extending that freedom to any adult, regardless of race, financial status, creed, gender and any other social class status. So not all activists or gay marriage supporters are the same. I also fully support any church's right to NOT recognize same sex marriage within the church.
Most gay people don't choose to be gay. There is hoards of evidence supporting this claim, and you all can whine about it as much as you want, but it doesn't change the facts. While we don't know specfically that there is a "gay gene", most agree that the propensity toward homosexuality isn't a conscious choice; the decision (if decision it is) is made in the depths of the psyche, not while browsing a menu of lifestyle options. Yes, the gay community owes a great deal of debt to human rights pioneers such as Rosa Parks, Martin Luther King Jr. and the myriad of others who came before us. That doesn't mean the push for gay rights isn't civil rights, simply because someone else was there first.
Civil rights is a movement among any group to resolve disenfranchisement from constitutionally guaranteed rights. This can occur among a racial minority, a gender majority, a religious group, and even those of an alternate sexual orientation.
Let's look at a brief history of the gay rights movement, shall we? The modern gay rights movement started when a bunch of police raided the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village: a gay bar. This was the straw the broke the camel's back. After years of enforced hatred and stupidity being put into law (Eisenhower making it illegal for any homosexual to hold down a federal job in the 50's, for example), people - gay people - had had enough. Gays fought back, there was a riot, and the aftermath lead to the modern movement for gay rights. It was heterosexuals who started it. At that point, there were no pride parades, no Queer as Folk on televison. Homosexuals did what you would still like them to do: they skulked along in the background, hiding themselves from the rest of the world. But the rest of the world wouldn't let us be.
The recent striking down of sodomy laws across the nation was based on a landmark case where a gay couple was having sex in the privacy of their own home, when police burst in and then arrested them for sodomy. It was the police who started it.
As soon as policy makers in this country began creating laws that treated homosexuals differently than other citizens, they created a social minority defined by sexual orientation. So bleat and blather about it all you want. Every time you claim that gays are this way or gays are that way, you strengthen the boundary lines and the perceptions that lead to minority status.
Personally, I'm for marriage being defined in two ways: as a social contract and as a religious contract. The Constitution is set up so that the government shouldn't interefere in the latter, but has no right to pick and choose to whom they may extend the former. Like it or don't like it, I don't much care. If you're arguing against gay marriage because your undies are all in a twist that gay people have the audacity to think they're a minority status, stop treating them that way and the division will go away and you'll be right. If you're arguing from a moral perspective, read some Jefferson, read the Constitution and then get over yourself. If you're arguing from a perspective of religious belief, get to a church and lock the doors, then practice whatever beliefs you see fit. If you're one of those nut jobs who thinks that the sanctity of one's own marriage will be defined by what legal rights I may or may not have, see a therapist. Seriously.
posted by Kat at 9:30 PM
<< Home