Chickens are better than Gays

At least that’s what Californians decided on Tuesday, and for this, I am currently disgusted to be a Californian.

As a state, we decided that Proposition 2, which prevents cruelty and inhumane treatment to animals and passed with an overwhelming majority of 62.3%, should hold more merit than Proposition 8, which revokes the right to have a same-sex marriage.

So now, I walk daily amongst people who believe that chickens (along with pigs and cows) have more rights than some of my best friends, and that’s just plain ridiculous.

Let’s take a look at some of the arguments for passing Prop 8, shall we?

According to Yes on 8:

It protects our children from being taught in public schools that “same-sex marriage” is the same as traditional marriage

False. In Massachusetts, children were taught about gay marriage in schools. California is not Massachusetts. California law prohibits any health and family issues taught at schools without parental consent.

and prevents other consequences to Californians who will be forced to…be tolerant of gay lifestyles.

I’m sorry…”forced to be tolerant?” FORCED TOLERANCE? First I would like to say…what the hell is wrong with tolerance? And secondly…you’re not ever forced to tolerate anything. You may be forced to have people and things you don’t tolerate around you, but no one is forcing you to actually tolerate them. And whether or not gay marriage was legalized, the “gay lifestyles,” as they put it, would still exist. You’re not forced to tolerate it now, so why would that change later?

Save traditional marriage.

Uhh…nothing happened to traditional marriage. All prop 8 would be doing is adding on more types of marriages. Traditional marriage can still be traditional marriage. This may be just semantics…but if you’re going to focus you’re entire campaign on one phrase, at least verify that it makes sense.

Passing Proposition 8…places into the Constitution the simple definition that a marriage is between a man and a woman.

My least favourite argument against same-sex marriage is when people whip out their dictionary and tell me that “marriage is, according to Webster’s Dictionary, the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. ” Good for you. It’s very impressive how well you use that dictionary of yours. But definitions change all the time. “Artificial” originally meant ‘full of artistic or technical skill,’ “awful” meant ‘full of awe’ i.e. delightful, amazing, et al, and “gay” meant happy.

I’m going to take this time to make an interjection: I have said, for years, that people should not use the phrase “that’s gay” because it replaces words like “stupid” or “dumb” with a word that describes who someone is. What if I said, “that’s black?” I would probably get beat up. I think people fear being called prejudice more than actually being one…but that’s a topic for another blog. Anyway, my sister text messaged me and said she wanted to show me a commercial that looks like it was made by me. Check it out.

And I DO understand the “sanctity of marriage” argument, but religious beliefs have no merit in the decision on giving and revoking rights to human beings. Separation of Church and State, my friends.

We elected our first African American President and denied gay people the right to marry. As a people, we have come so far, yet little has changed. I could talk about this forever. Instead, I’m going to make a few bullet points with extra thoughts that had no place prior to now:

  • Yes, we change definitions in the dictionary, but we also add words to the dictionary! Here are a few of my favourite recently added words: unibrow, ginormous, truthiness.
  • I watched 6 hours of CNN election coverage, occasionally switching to other networks. The Daily Show/The Colbert Report mentioned a long title for this year’s Indecision 2008 in which they spelled “judgment” with an E making it “judgEment.” Come on, guys!
  • I watched a little election coverage on the “fair and balanced” Fox News who was, characteristically, un-fair and un-balanced in their coverage, especially when speaking with non-president elect Ralph Nader. Good entertainment though.
  • I heard a comedian at an open mic night last night say what many of us have been thinking: “I’m tired of people talking about how we have a black President. How about talking about how we have an intelligent President?” Here here!
  • Here’s what my friend, Courtney, has to say about Prop 8: It makes me wonder when “all men are created equal” is going to actually apply to all people in this country. Restricting rights because of sexual orientation is no different than when rights were restricted based on race and sex. Let’s hear it for civil rightsand women’s suffrage! I suppose now we have to legalize love! The hypocrisy of it all! So much for being progressive. So much for let freedom ring and equality for all. I suppose we have to consider that this country was not founded on equality. It was founded on discrimination and the fight for equality. So we fight. Here’s to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness…the trinity of unalienable rights endowed to ALL people

All in all, I’m so happy Obama won. Rachel and I won’t have to wear black, as planned, to mourn the loss of America. And we all, no matter who we voted for, played a role in making history and in changing the world. Today, and for many days to come, I am proud to be an American, just not proud to be a Californian.

-Erinintermittent waves of disappointment

P.S. I apologize for the length. Thanks for sticking with me.

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “Chickens are better than Gays

  1. I was wondering what you think of Obama, that he supports civil unions, providing that we give rights to homosexuals like we do to chickens, but that he is against gay marriages? (for me, i would agree that this provides the needed rights without compromising beliefs). thanks for writing.

  2. I love Obama and I respect his opinion about gay marriage, but I don’t agree with it. My problem is that I whole-heartedly believe that same-sex marriage should be legalized. There are too many issues involved with a civil union to make that an acceptable replacement:

    Civil Unions are only recognized on a state level and not a federal level…and that’s only the states that have civil unions. A couple with a civil union from California wouldn’t be recognized as having a civil union in some other states, like Connecticut or Georgia.

    Plus, it is discrimination. Many say it is not, but the truth of the matter is, a civil union is making a separate institution for gay people, which is just like segregation.

    There are two different types of marriages: Civil Marriage and Religious Marriage. Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Marriages would still allow religous institutions to define their own requirements for marriage. Civil marriage is completely without church.

    All in all, I don’t agree that it provides the needed rights and I don’t think that allowing a civil marriage would compromise beliefs. There are many things that people don’t believe in but are legalized. This is no different. That’s the price of living in America, freedom and equality for all people, whether we “believe” it is right or not.

  3. I had never considered that civil unions are only at the state level, thanks for pointing that out. But, prop 8 was only at the state level, so if it hadn’t passed, wouldn’t there still be the same problem? The San Francisco judges only changed the state constitution, right?

    It seems, to me at least, that it’s more a matter of wanting to be accepted as equal than of having equal rights. If a civil union had all the same rights as a marriage, I’m guessing you’d still feel that’s discriminatory. Is that right?

    If so, while, truly, I sympathize with that pain, it’s not someone’s right to make other people accept their view. We talk about tolerance, but not to the extent that someone isn’t allowed to differ in beliefs, but rather so that people with different beliefs are given the respect deserving of another human being. Sometimes the pc term of tolerance is used as a bludgeon, intolerant of anyone who won’t tolerate what is considered pc to tolerate. Know what I mean?

    Again, I want to make sure I say thanks. I really appreciate you’ve created a safe place to discuss different views without it degenerating into some mud-slinging contest!

  4. >> There are two different types of marriages: Civil Marriage and Religious Marriage. Legalizing Same-Sex Civil Marriages would still allow religous institutions to define their own requirements for marriage. Civil marriage is completely without church.

    Well put. I wish more people realized this.

    Excellent, articulate blog. woot woot.

  5. Oh, dear, now I’m confused. Is the civil union that Erin talks about the same thing as the civil marriage you talk about?

  6. Civil Marriage is just the technical term used for legal marriage. I used the term “civil marriage” to highlight the difference between civil marriage and religous marriage.

    The answer to your question is No. They are two different things. One offers more rights than the other.

    Thanks!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s