Becoming the Enemy
During the gay marriage debates I have had many discussions among friends and family about the subject. Some were for it and some were against it. We said our peace about it and continued to complain about gas prices. Yet, on a national stage these problems seem to mount. I have publicly kept quiet about such issues but after hearing this segment about gay marriage on NPR I feel it is my time to sound off.
First let me get this out of the way…I, in no way, have any problems with the gay community or their lifestyle choices. One of the reasons that America is such a great country is that we have the freedom to choose how we should live. I have known and know homosexual people and to me they are just that…people. I don’t classify them as gay. I don’t say, “That’s my gay friend Bill,” I just say “That’s my friend Bill.” People should not be classified by their ethnicity or their sexual preference.
With that out in the open I can now begin my rant…
First off, gay marriage advocates, shut the fuck up. You are slowly getting what you want. Stop pushing or else you are going to make people hate you…not for your sexual preference but for the fact that you are now becoming the ones who are shoving your ideals down other people’s throats. You are becoming just like the religious groups that you have fought against. Being proud that you are gay does not mean that you have to take up the sword in every small battle. I’m proud that I am from the South and of my heritage, but that does not mean that I side with racists and Confederates in their fights.
I want to use two of the examples from the NPR program as sounding boards to drive this rant. If you didn't hear the program or haven’t read the article then please do so now. I’ll give you a moment.
Done? Okay here goes.
First, the pavilion issue. My thoughts are that the lesbian couple was in the wrong. Flat wrong. This was the equivalent of throwing a tantrum because you didn’t get what you want. The fact is that the Methodist organization that owned the pavilion had the right to choose who could use it and who could not. Everyone has the right to marry the person that they love, not everyone has the right to marry where they want. The lesbians argued that the pavilion was a public place to be used even though it was built by the church, owned by the church, maintained by the church, and on church land. The fact that they let other people use it somehow made it public property. This is the equivalent on me letting neighborhood people whom I know and like use my basketball goal and then getting sued by someone whom I didn’t see eye to eye with for not letting them use it.
They use the word discrimination, but is it really? Would it be discrimination if the church had refused to let Satanists use the pavilion? Is it discrimination if a Muslim refuses to let a Catholic use their mosque for a wedding? Do Jews discriminate against pigs because they don’t eat pork at their family dinners? The point is that the gay couple who wanted to get married should have respected the church’s wishes instead of pushing their view and lifestyle onto those whose religious beliefs conflict with their own. Everyone has the right to choose who they are (Methodist, homosexual, Republican) but that does not mean that everyone else has to like or accept your choice. That is the definition of freedom.
The next issue that I want to touch on is the couple who sued the photographer. First off, let me say that no where in the Constitution or its Amendments does it provide for protection against discrimination due to sexual orientation. The reason that this Amendment will never pass is because it would make it okay for people to fuck sheep. The Constitution only provides protection against discrimination when it comes to religion, race (ethnicity), and sex (male or female not homosexual or heterosexual). So discrimination against a homosexual person is still constitutionally legal. I am not saying that it is right, I am just saying that it is legal. Individual state constitutions are responsible for providing those rights.
Secondly, the court’s decision was a major faux pas in my book because it effectively persecuted someone for their religious beliefs. The couple used the argument that since the photographers provided a public, commercial service that they had to extend this service to everyone. Does this mean that I can walk into McDonald’s with no shirt and no shoes and sue when they refuse me service? Does this mean that the photographers now have to take pictures at a three person Mormon wedding even though their religion believes that you can only have one spouse? Or take pictures of a sheep fucker and his “lady” even though most religions condemn this practice? The simple fact is that gay marriage versus religion is a hot topic right now and the court chose to “fight” against discrimination while at the same time upholding it. Man, I love irony.
Once again, I do not endorse the discrimination of homosexuals because we are all people, but I also do not endorse someone telling you that you have to accept their choices and way of life. This is why the couple was in the wrong in this case. Besides…why would you want someone who doesn’t share your views taking pictures on a special day like your wedding? You are going to get shitty pictures. This was the photographers’ defense as well. I would think that in the homosexual community, where openness in such a valued issue, that they would have accepted the fact that the photographers did not share their views and move on to someone who did so that they would get quality work. Instead they chose to “make an example” and defend their views and why they believe that homosexuality is acceptable. But didn’t religious groups do the same thing when they publicly tried to write homosexuality off and were ridiculed by gay rights groups for being close-minded?
Listen…I don’t care where your sexual orientation lies except for pedophiles and rapists. Taking people against their will (both children and adults) is never acceptable. I’m not bitching about these people because they are gay…I’m bitching about them because they are acting like pricks. They are endorsing a double standard (“You have to accept our ideals but we don’t have to accept yours”). This is what rubbed me wrong when I heard this broadcast. You can’t shout for equality and then bitch about someone else having the right to an opinion. By doing that you become the enemy that you fight against, intolerance
(And for those who think that as a white male I have never had to face discrimination then think again. Explain to me why I graduated high school with a 3.95 cumulative average, was four points away from a perfect score on my ACT test, and still had to pay for my college tuition and work 50 hours a week the entire time I was in school. I looked in Matthew Lesko’s book of scholarships and realized that none of them applied to a healthy, Caucasian, male with good intelligence.)
I guess what gay advocates are trying to teach everyone in the public, commercial sector is to lie. Instead of telling someone that you do not share their views and thank them for the consideration that they gave you, you have to tell them that you are busy and can not accommodate their function. You are previously tied up with the wedding of a sheep fucker and his bride.
First let me get this out of the way…I, in no way, have any problems with the gay community or their lifestyle choices. One of the reasons that America is such a great country is that we have the freedom to choose how we should live. I have known and know homosexual people and to me they are just that…people. I don’t classify them as gay. I don’t say, “That’s my gay friend Bill,” I just say “That’s my friend Bill.” People should not be classified by their ethnicity or their sexual preference.
With that out in the open I can now begin my rant…
First off, gay marriage advocates, shut the fuck up. You are slowly getting what you want. Stop pushing or else you are going to make people hate you…not for your sexual preference but for the fact that you are now becoming the ones who are shoving your ideals down other people’s throats. You are becoming just like the religious groups that you have fought against. Being proud that you are gay does not mean that you have to take up the sword in every small battle. I’m proud that I am from the South and of my heritage, but that does not mean that I side with racists and Confederates in their fights.
I want to use two of the examples from the NPR program as sounding boards to drive this rant. If you didn't hear the program or haven’t read the article then please do so now. I’ll give you a moment.
Done? Okay here goes.
First, the pavilion issue. My thoughts are that the lesbian couple was in the wrong. Flat wrong. This was the equivalent of throwing a tantrum because you didn’t get what you want. The fact is that the Methodist organization that owned the pavilion had the right to choose who could use it and who could not. Everyone has the right to marry the person that they love, not everyone has the right to marry where they want. The lesbians argued that the pavilion was a public place to be used even though it was built by the church, owned by the church, maintained by the church, and on church land. The fact that they let other people use it somehow made it public property. This is the equivalent on me letting neighborhood people whom I know and like use my basketball goal and then getting sued by someone whom I didn’t see eye to eye with for not letting them use it.
They use the word discrimination, but is it really? Would it be discrimination if the church had refused to let Satanists use the pavilion? Is it discrimination if a Muslim refuses to let a Catholic use their mosque for a wedding? Do Jews discriminate against pigs because they don’t eat pork at their family dinners? The point is that the gay couple who wanted to get married should have respected the church’s wishes instead of pushing their view and lifestyle onto those whose religious beliefs conflict with their own. Everyone has the right to choose who they are (Methodist, homosexual, Republican) but that does not mean that everyone else has to like or accept your choice. That is the definition of freedom.
The next issue that I want to touch on is the couple who sued the photographer. First off, let me say that no where in the Constitution or its Amendments does it provide for protection against discrimination due to sexual orientation. The reason that this Amendment will never pass is because it would make it okay for people to fuck sheep. The Constitution only provides protection against discrimination when it comes to religion, race (ethnicity), and sex (male or female not homosexual or heterosexual). So discrimination against a homosexual person is still constitutionally legal. I am not saying that it is right, I am just saying that it is legal. Individual state constitutions are responsible for providing those rights.
Secondly, the court’s decision was a major faux pas in my book because it effectively persecuted someone for their religious beliefs. The couple used the argument that since the photographers provided a public, commercial service that they had to extend this service to everyone. Does this mean that I can walk into McDonald’s with no shirt and no shoes and sue when they refuse me service? Does this mean that the photographers now have to take pictures at a three person Mormon wedding even though their religion believes that you can only have one spouse? Or take pictures of a sheep fucker and his “lady” even though most religions condemn this practice? The simple fact is that gay marriage versus religion is a hot topic right now and the court chose to “fight” against discrimination while at the same time upholding it. Man, I love irony.
Once again, I do not endorse the discrimination of homosexuals because we are all people, but I also do not endorse someone telling you that you have to accept their choices and way of life. This is why the couple was in the wrong in this case. Besides…why would you want someone who doesn’t share your views taking pictures on a special day like your wedding? You are going to get shitty pictures. This was the photographers’ defense as well. I would think that in the homosexual community, where openness in such a valued issue, that they would have accepted the fact that the photographers did not share their views and move on to someone who did so that they would get quality work. Instead they chose to “make an example” and defend their views and why they believe that homosexuality is acceptable. But didn’t religious groups do the same thing when they publicly tried to write homosexuality off and were ridiculed by gay rights groups for being close-minded?
Listen…I don’t care where your sexual orientation lies except for pedophiles and rapists. Taking people against their will (both children and adults) is never acceptable. I’m not bitching about these people because they are gay…I’m bitching about them because they are acting like pricks. They are endorsing a double standard (“You have to accept our ideals but we don’t have to accept yours”). This is what rubbed me wrong when I heard this broadcast. You can’t shout for equality and then bitch about someone else having the right to an opinion. By doing that you become the enemy that you fight against, intolerance
(And for those who think that as a white male I have never had to face discrimination then think again. Explain to me why I graduated high school with a 3.95 cumulative average, was four points away from a perfect score on my ACT test, and still had to pay for my college tuition and work 50 hours a week the entire time I was in school. I looked in Matthew Lesko’s book of scholarships and realized that none of them applied to a healthy, Caucasian, male with good intelligence.)
I guess what gay advocates are trying to teach everyone in the public, commercial sector is to lie. Instead of telling someone that you do not share their views and thank them for the consideration that they gave you, you have to tell them that you are busy and can not accommodate their function. You are previously tied up with the wedding of a sheep fucker and his bride.
posted by Burning Stickman at 10:57 AM
2 Comments:
Hello Ryan !
I live in Paris and used to go to church with you. I agree with your view of gay rights, but am a little surprised at your language. :)
I apologize Ruthie...for my language. I'm not sure I remember you just by your first name. My language, throughout my blogs, may be considered by some as "strong," but it is how I feel. I can certainly express my opinions on subjects without cursing (I do so often in conversations and debates) but I use this blog as a place for both humor and expression...so I like to be unfettered. Anyone can reach me on Myspace @ www.myspace.com/burningstickman or my e-mail @ thebluephoenix1@hotmail.com.
Post a Comment
<< Home