Bigotry
Today’s manic rush to declare a constitutional ban on gay marriage is another example of this administration’s willingness to use bigotry to boost its falling numbers. This is the president who plunged this coutnry into a war in Iraq, caused the most massive deficit in the history, had the least number of jobs created since Herbert Hoover, and has the lowest rating than almost any other president during the second term.
The ban on gay marriage is deeply wrong. Gay people who live in communion with one another and have no benefits whatsoever. And instead of practicing the democracy and human rights that he preaches, Bush, once again does the exact opposite: campaigns to enshrine hatred and bigotry into the constitution. Why? Just so that he can get his poll numbers up. It is ridiculous! I watched Senator Brownback go on and on today about gay marriage, while the world is still reeling from another massacre of civilians by US troops, our troops are being fired upon in Iraq, and civilians are getting blown up. Have they no shame?
June 5th, 2006 at 5:28 pm
No, it seems they don’t. Makes me think of the religious argument that people choose to be gay. Why in hell would anybody choose a life of being discriminated against, beat up, mocked, and generally treated as if you’ve got the plague.
June 5th, 2006 at 7:05 pm
I agree with most of your points here especially the one about bigotry to boost its falling numbers. However every administration used “wag the dog†tactics as a diversion or to boosts its ratings.
Gay marriage is very complicated just like abortion, so my view is not clearly defined here, but I do think that every human in USA should have same rights, but you need to have certain constraints. Let’s say you do permit gay marriage in all states, and then someone can say “I would like to marry an orangutan and have same rights as everyone elseâ€. I am not comparing some people with orangutans but just asking where do you draw the line? I think this has nothing to do with politics or religion. It needs to be majority vote. If more then 50% of USA thinks we should ban gay marriage then let’s ban it. If more then 50% say not to ban then it is allowed. In this case you have to use statistics since you cannot use religion or whatever “you†think it should be right.
However, if you do ban gay marriage, give them same rights but call it something different then marriage (civil union or something like that) if that’s going to satisfy majority of Americans. Personally I have no idea why lot of people opposes the idea of gay marriage. The only reason I can think of is religion, and as we said you cannot use religion to rule or make rules, so it shouldn’t be an issue at all. Most people who are afraid or despise gay are insecure in their own sexuality or are just not happy with their lives. I am just wondering how majority of people who oppose gays would deal with homosexuality if they had power. You cannot make gay straight so how would they treat it? Kill it? Put it in the mental hospital? I say let them live their lives as they see fit and don’t worry what it is going to happen to you, because if you are secure in your own sexuality and your faith is true then you have nothing to worry about.
My 0.02c
June 6th, 2006 at 8:47 am
I agree with moody that most people who are so rabidly anti-gay are either sexually frustrated or have issues with their own sexuality. I am always amused by those idiots who say that gay marriage jepordizes their marriage. How does this make sense?
But I disagree that gay marriage should be banned because most people support the ban. First, I think the statistics can be disputed here. The country is split down the middle. And most people seem to support giving civil rights to gay unions. But some object to calling it a marriage.
I think that gay people are right in demanding nothing less than marriage because marriage is a civil union (one recognized by the secular state and not by church) and as full citizens of this state, they should be entitled to all the rights that go along with it. If religious authorities object to it, let them use their own institutions (church, etc) to express it. Thus, nobody is forcing them to perform gay marriage ceremonies in churches. But to push down their homophobic values down our throats through the public secular institutions is just unacceptable.
And the comparison to oraguntans doesn’t work because nobody is marrying animals. These are human beings who love each other and want the state to recognize this and give them the benefits they deserve.