Archive for August 5th, 2010

Hooray for some fucking common sense

Thank goodness that on a rare (very, very rare) occasion, the government works like it fucking should.

I’m referring to Judge Walker overruling Proposition 8 in California in this instance, just to be clear.

This is an issue that’s important to me for many reasons, but without getting into too many personal details let me just say that back in the day I wrote an editorial for my college newspaper about separation of church and state. Twice. So aside from any personal reasons I have for supporting same-sex marriage, I also have an understanding of basic politics that apparently A MAJORITY OF THIS NATION HAS FUCKING FORGOTTEN. Because it is apparent to me, personal stake in the issue or no, that a ban on same-sex marriage is unconstitutional. It’s also apparent to me that this should be a non-issue, because of two reasons:

1. Equal rights.

2. Separation of church and state.

We’ve been through #1 numerous times in the past. Slavery, voting, civil rights in the 1950s, internment camps…the list goes on, and that’s only in the U.S. It’s even longer when you consider the entire fucking planet and all the ways we like to try and oppress one another. But apparently America is too fucking stupid to learn from the past. We tried “separate but equal” once, and it DIDN’T FUCKING WORK BECAUSE IT’S A TERRIBLE IDEA. So what makes you assholes think it’s going to work this time around? Breaking news: It won’t. So let’s just skip all this bullshit and get to the part where EVERYBODY IS TREATED EQUALLY.

Also, a majority opinion doesn’t change the concept of equal rights (which is pretty clearly listed in the fourteenth amendment, as Judge Walker pointed out). Just because 52% of voters said yes to Prop 8 does not make it right. Back in the day most people thought slavery was OK too, but guess what—IT WASN’T. It was just socially acceptable. THERE IS A DIFFERENCE. Also, this is exactly what our government is supposed to do: protect a minority group when the majority is trying to oppress them in violation of the constitution. SO DON’T START BITCHING ABOUT HOW THE JUDGE CAN’T OVERRULE THE VOTERS. That’s exactly what he’s SUPPOSED to do when a majority of people seem to have had a collective stroke and lost their ability to think rationally. Because honestly, anyone with an elementary school–level education should remember that ALL PAST INSTANCES OF DISCRIMINATION FOR ANY REASON HAVE BEEN WRONG. There is not ONE INSTANCE where this type of attempt at legalizing some kind of discrimination has been a good idea. Because to anyone with half a fucking brain, it is obviously a STUPID IDEA.

Of course, they’re trying to be smarter about it this time. They’re trying to pass laws that “protect heterosexual marriage,” trying to disguise the oppressive nature therein. As if gays everywhere are planning to somehow kidnap the institution of marriage once they have access to it. THAT ISN’T EVEN POSSIBLE BECAUSE MARRIAGE IS A CONCEPT, NOT AN OBJECT. The only thing that needs protecting in this instance is EQUAL RIGHTS. Nothing else is being threatened (that’s a word they like to throw around too, as if all the gays are holding knives to heterosexual marriage’s throat. AGAIN, NOT POSSIBLE). If you’re in a heterosexual marriage and you think that same-sex couples you don’t even know getting married is going to destroy YOUR marriage, there’s something wrong with you, not them. If what someone else plans to do with their life—and their plans don’t involve you at all—will have such a major impact on you, maybe you should try being less of a creepy stalker. Because that’s the only instance I can think of where some stranger’s life choices are going to affect you. So stop pretending like you have such a great fucking stake in this decision, because unless you’re part of the LGBTQ community and you want to marry your partner, you have NO STAKE IN THIS. You just need a group of people to be oppressed so you can feel like you’re special, and since that didn’t work out with women and African-Americans, now you need to try it on the gays. Breaking news: It’s not going to work this time, either. Suck it up.

Okay, that about covers #1. Let’s move on to #2. To me, this is what should have settled this “controversy” before it even started:


You can read it for yourself right here. (And if you start to get picky, here’s a letter from Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptists where he explains the separation. There’s also some interesting information in Everson v. Board of Education! IT’S A WELL-ESTABLISHED CONCEPT.)

Because you know what? The only reason this is even an “issue” is because of fucking religion. And frankly, when it comes to my rights, or the rights of others, I don’t give a shit what your religious texts say. Take that giant fucking book and shove it right up your ass. Because it has NO WEIGHT when making laws. Hate to break it to you (no I don’t). The founding fathers (gag) believed in this so much that they put it in the FIRST FUCKING AMENDMENT. So take your religion and go home.

Honestly, to me, the “issue” of same-sex marriage is an open and shut case. Here is the logic:

a. The only place where it’s considered a bad thing is in religious texts (anyone who says it’s a “personal belief” is still pulling it from religion, even if they don’t think they are).
b. The first amendment clearly states that religion should have no affect on government.

See how fucking easy that was? Now, the U.S. government isn’t exactly great at keeping religion out of politics—in fact, politicians make a habit of mixing the two. It’s annoying, because most of them are Christian or Catholic or some derivative, and there are plenty of other religions, not to mention people who aren’t religious at all, but it only really starts to piss me off in instances like this, where suddenly they’re trying to push their views on the rest of us by turning them into laws. I TAKE ISSUE WITH THIS, ASSHOLES. ESPECIALLY when the law you’re trying to pass is in favor of OPPRESSING A GROUP OF PEOPLE. Why don’t you want to try and turn the good parts of your religion into laws? Like “love thy neighbor” or whatever?* OH RIGHT, BECAUSE A LOT OF YOU ARE FUCKING HYPOCRITES. Only love your neighbor if they aren’t gay, guys! If they’re gay, LAY ON THE HATE. Jesus would totally approve!

And before someone tries to argue that allowing same-sex marriage also violates the first amendment because it would go against some religion: You are wrong. There, I saved you a lot of trouble finding that out the hard way. Let me tell you why, because I’m nice like that. Allowing same-sex marriage does not interfere with your ability to practice your religion. You can believe all you want, until the day you die, that same-sex marriage is wrong. You can go to protests and write blogs about it. Nobody is going to stop you (BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL). So since the law would not stop you from practicing your religious beliefs, it wouldn’t be oppressing you and thus would not be violating the first amendment.

Aside from all that LOGIC, I’m also fucking sick of listening to majorities whine about the supposed oppression they suffer. Sorry, Christians, but you are not oppressed and you won’t be oppressed if gays can get married. GET OVER YOURSELVES.

Breaking news: Sometimes people believe in different things (or nothing at all)! LEARN TO FUCKING LIVE WITH IT ALREADY. As long as the U.S. government manages to function even one-quarter as well as it’s theoretically supposed to, there will never be a law made that favors any specific religion(s). You might as well get used to it now, assholes.

Between this and the abortion rights “issue” (I’ll get into that in another post), I feel like we’re moving backward in time. And the past sucked. I’d like to keep moving forward, thanks.

But since “accepting people who are different than you” doesn’t seem to be easy for the religious folks to swallow, I won’t hold my breath. I’ll just keep writing about SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE until the majority finally gets over that stroke of idiocy they had. Although it seems to happen every few decades. They might want to get that looked at.

*Just to be clear, I’d be against this too on the basis of the first amendment, but I’d at least be in favor of the sentiment behind it.


Monthly Raging

August 2010
« Jul   Sep »

Get the rage delivered right to your e-mail!

Join 4 other followers

Instant Rage Via Twitter