How dare the gay and lesbian community demand to be treated like everyone else! Who do they think they are human beings? The gay rights debate has been a hot topic for decades now. With recent promises from President Obama on ending Don't Ask Don't Tell and other limitations in the gay community, some are saying the end is near. I say are you serious?! Its 2009 people! I am baffled that we live in a so called "progressive" society, yet certain people are still being discriminated against and many feel it is ok.
Marriage is not a bond under God. Rather, it is a legal contract recognized by the American courts. Since the judicial process should be separate from religious doctrine, why should a religious position have any bearing on a civil process? This debate is not about religion, it is about how a state recognizes a person. When you deny two people from having a legal marriage contract, you are not just denying marriage, but their basic rights as American citizens. These rights would include visiting their partner’s child in a hospital, inheriting children from their partner if he/she doesn't have a valid will, obtaining joint health, home, and auto insurance, joint rental agreements and joint medical decisions. These basic rights that all heterosexual couples have and don’t even think about are being denied to same sex partners. Denying marriage to same-sex couples removes from one group a fundamental, important human right -the right to marry the person that one loves and to whom one has made a commitment. That is unfair and unjust in a democracy.
Our country has a bad track record for denying people their basic rights due to fear. A fear of people who have different colored skin, people of different genders, people with disabilities, and now people who love differently. Thankfully there has been some progress. Five years ago same sex couples were allowed to marry in Massachusetts. Today, 16,500 same sex couples have married in Massachusetts. Connecticut, Vermont, and Iowa have also adopted full marriage equality. 18,000 couples were married in California before Proposition 8 brought marriage equality to a halt. There is a constitutional amendment in the works that would define marriage as between a man and women, therefore making it illegal to marry the same sex. This goes against our founding fathers ideals of equality for all citizens, free of religious persecution.
One main argument against same sex marriage is that being a homosexual is a choice. Well, a disabled person doesn’t choose to be disabled; an African American doesn’t choose to be African American. They are simply born that way. So my question is how can a “valid argument” can be that homosexuals choose to be gay. No one in their right mind would choose to suffer the denial of human rights and discrimination that the gay community receives from society. Equality for all should be a belief of everyone in our country regardless of their personal beliefs.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Sunday, October 11, 2009
The Anti-Bush Nobel Peace Prize
“The Anti-Bush Nobel Peace Prize” is a blog post from The Smirking Chimp defending the recent Nobel Peace Prize recipient, President Obama. In the blog writer Cenk Uygur slaps the wrists of the republican haters claiming they’re still upset that George Bush is no longer in power. Uygur believes that Obama received the award not so much for what he has accomplished so far, but for simply not being George W. Bush. Yes, this is really his main argument.
Being that The Smirking Chimp is a very liberal site, the intended audience would also be those who call themselves liberals. I can’t imagine Rush Limbaugh is a religious follower. Cenk Uygurs credibility is only that he has been a member of The Smirking Chimp for over three years.
The post straddles the hypocritical line. Uygur stated, “the next time you talk about the President a little respect is on order.” This coming from a blogger who writes for a site which states it’s “in dishonor of the worst president in U.S. history” with a comical ape-like picture of George Bush, mouth gaping, with a return to sender stamp over his head. His accusations that the reason people are upset over Obama’s win is because they’re still sour George Bush is out I think are not true. Denis Mukwege, a gynecologist in the Congo who is putting vicious rape victims back together was one of nominees favored to win, and in my opinion should have won. Their argument is that Mukwege, or Afghan women’s rights activist Sima Samur have actually done things to save lives, when Obama hasn’t been in office long enough to make real changes.Yes, he has made big plans, but he simply hasn't been able to enact much due to not even being in office a year. Now I am sure there are those far right individuals who fit the crazy republican bush lover stereotype the author bashes, but those are the exceptions, not the norm.
I think the hardest thing for conservatives to comprehend is why the President won. Many do not know the actual reason for the prize. According to the founder of the prize, Alfred Nobel the Nobel should be awarded to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." This is the reason he has won, for his "efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
This blog is another prime example of how far partisanship has gone off the deep end. People these days are more focused on who’s liberal or conservative instead of stopping and listening to the real issues on both sides and finding a way together as a nation to solve them.
Being that The Smirking Chimp is a very liberal site, the intended audience would also be those who call themselves liberals. I can’t imagine Rush Limbaugh is a religious follower. Cenk Uygurs credibility is only that he has been a member of The Smirking Chimp for over three years.
The post straddles the hypocritical line. Uygur stated, “the next time you talk about the President a little respect is on order.” This coming from a blogger who writes for a site which states it’s “in dishonor of the worst president in U.S. history” with a comical ape-like picture of George Bush, mouth gaping, with a return to sender stamp over his head. His accusations that the reason people are upset over Obama’s win is because they’re still sour George Bush is out I think are not true. Denis Mukwege, a gynecologist in the Congo who is putting vicious rape victims back together was one of nominees favored to win, and in my opinion should have won. Their argument is that Mukwege, or Afghan women’s rights activist Sima Samur have actually done things to save lives, when Obama hasn’t been in office long enough to make real changes.Yes, he has made big plans, but he simply hasn't been able to enact much due to not even being in office a year. Now I am sure there are those far right individuals who fit the crazy republican bush lover stereotype the author bashes, but those are the exceptions, not the norm.
I think the hardest thing for conservatives to comprehend is why the President won. Many do not know the actual reason for the prize. According to the founder of the prize, Alfred Nobel the Nobel should be awarded to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses." This is the reason he has won, for his "efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples."
This blog is another prime example of how far partisanship has gone off the deep end. People these days are more focused on who’s liberal or conservative instead of stopping and listening to the real issues on both sides and finding a way together as a nation to solve them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)