Dear North Carolina, You Did it Wrong

Tuesday was election day in North Carolina.  On the ballot was the issue of gay rights.  Once again, it failed to pass as we have seen happen multiple times across the country.  I have to wonder, why are gay rights even an issue? And how is it possible that there are so many people in this country who still have their heads up their asses?

If you listen to the haters out there, they will quote the bible, (although they are hard pressed to find the exact verse, and usually it’s pulled out of context) about how man shall not lie with man.  *side note, have you ever noticed it’s only MALE gay rights they have a problem with? If two girls want to get it on, they want permission to watch.  The gay rights issue isn’t about sex.  Shocking, I know.  It’s about denying or allowing (allowing, what a pompous fucking word to use… we allow you to love your partner.) gays to love who they love.  Openly. With the same rights and benefits afforded heterosexual couples. A friend of mine who happens to be a gay man once said to me, there can be no real progress on this issue until we get it out of the bedroom.  This isn’t a sex issue, it’s a love, commitment, partner issue.

We have Constitutional Rights, and God Given Rights. I have read the Declaration of Independence. We are given the right to Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, those three things are considered inalienable rights of men.  So who the hell are these closed-minded numbnuts who think they have been given the right to trample all over gays’ right to pursue happiness?  And why do they think they have the authority to determine what happiness looks like.

In the interest of pursuing attention millions of dollars happiness, Kim Kardashian was allowed, by law, to marry and divorce Kris Humphries all in less time than it took for Jackie Chan to travel around the world. Years ago, Britney Spears was allowed, by law, to marry and divorce Jason Alexander faster than it took the ink to dry on the marriage license. Because clearly those marriages still upheld the sanctity of the institution of marriage and didn’t make a mockery of it in any way. Clearly. How many people around the country get married for green cards?  How many get married for health insurance?  How many get married for tax breaks?  How many people get married every fucking year for reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with love?

And yet, there are thousands upon thousands of people across the country who can’t get married for love.

Gay rights, though, isn’t just about getting married. When the state doesn’t recognize the relationship, the commitment gay couples have, then there are a whole slew of other issues to contend with.  They can’t be covered on each other’s insurance, they can’t make any critical life saving decision in hospitals, it’s difficult if not impossible to adopt children.  Which frankly is a whole lot of bullshit.  Because once a heterosexual couple have been together for seven years, it’s considered a common law marriage and they have all the legal rights a  couple with a state issued marriage license has.  Excuse me, What?!?!

So basically what you are saying is, living together without being married  is not only OK but is treated the same as a marriage, but marrying someone of the same-sex is not. Double standard much?

We may be fighting the battle in every state in the country over and over again, but the war will have to be waged in the United States Supreme Court.  Until they say it is unconstitutional for states to prevent gays from getting married, until they say it is unconstitutional for states to withhold anyone’s right to pursue happiness, until the Supreme Court says Hey Assholes get off your pompous high horses because it says that all men are created equal and should be afforded the same and equal rights, there will be people who know the true meaning of love and commitment who can not get married, and people who don’t, that can.

Intolerable

I sit here this morning, watching Sean Penn in Milk.  What an amazing story.  Thirty plus years ago he fought for gay rights, for gay equality.  A fight that continues still today.

During the Presidential election the topic of same sex marriage was debated by the VP candidates.  A topic they both agreed on.  They both opposed it.

Where did our tolerance go?  Not just for gay and lesbians, but for everyone?  We as a people are losing our tolerance.  We’ve adapted a “My way or the highway” mentality, passing judgment on people who are different than we are.

Prop 8 was just overturned, declared unconstitutional.  Government is still trying to deny people civil rights, basic civil rights.

My question during the Presidential debate was “Why not?”

Why are people in this day and age being told, by our government that their relationship will not be recognized?  Again I have to ask “Why not?”

Who will actually be hurt by allowing same sex marriages?  Allowing them won’t take away anything from traditional man/woman marriages.  There will be no rights lost, no ‘benefits’ lost.  There will be no harm done.  It will have no adverse effect on existing or future marriages of heterosexual couples.

So, again, I ask, Why Not.  What is the reason for this non-support?  On what is that aversion based?  What are the reasons why they chose to not recognize these unions between two people?

Is it a religious objection?  Fine, you’re allowed your own personal beliefs and objections, but when it infringes on other people’s rights, (and you can dictate nationwide policy and law) then that’s playing God. There is that whole Separation of Church and State.  Government can not dictate religious beliefs, so why should religion be allowed to dictate policies and law?

“They will be allowed the same civil liberties as heterosexual couples.”  Well, not really.  Will they be covered on each other’s health insurance?  Will they be allowed to make life or death decisions in the event the other is incapable?  Will their commitment be recognized in the same way a heterosexual marriage will be?

If their civil liberties will not be interfered with by the government, (as the candidates claim), then why are they (same sex couples) not being allowed to marry?  If they will be given the same treatment, then technically the only thing the government is withholding is the marriage certificate.

Why is that the threshold the government chooses not to cross?  Why walk right up to that line and stop just short of the goal?  Again, I ask Why Not?  Who loses by allowing same sex marriages?

Bumper asked me during our conversation on this topic, what is the one thing heterosexual couples can do that same sex couples can not?  Reproduce.  But reproduction can not be the defining factor in who is allowed to marry and who isn’t.  After all there are heterosexual couples who can not reproduce.  If reproduction is the defining factor, does that mean couples have to produce an heir in order to marry?  That’s sort of putting the horse before the cart. And if reproduction is the defining factor then couples who are unable to have children, who suffer with infertility will not be allowed to marry and therefore their rights are now being revoked due to a medical issue.  Yes, that is dramatic and far reaching but it’s a logical progression of thought carried out to the dramatic degree.

Again, it comes down to Why Not?  What is the reason the government feels it is their right to step in and interfere in people’s pursuit of happiness?  If they have already made that level of commitment to each other, why keep the marriage certificate (and the rights afforded married couples) from them?  If it’s truly just a piece of paper, then give it to them already.  But we all know, it’s not just a piece of paper.

Why not?  Who gets hurt by allowing same sex marriages?  There is no legal basis, just personal, and maybe even religious objections.  Unless of course I’m missing something entirely (which is possible).

Granted. we’ve made progress since Harvey Milk was elected to office in the 70’s. But there is still progress to be made.

A lot of progress.

The intolerance isn’t limited to gays and lesbians. We as a people have grown intolerable of anyone who differs from us.  I experienced this first hand on the interwebs just last week. I was just shy of being told to Hush because I dared to ask a question and hold a belief that differed from someone else.  She wanted my voice silenced because she could not tolerate a difference of opinion.  She claimed she wanted Elizabeth Hasselbeck to “hush” because she sounded like an idiot.  So, Elizabeth should be silenced because of a difference in intelligence levels?  So, now, only ‘smart’ people are allowed to have their opinion heard?

Intolerable.

Maybe I want to live in Eutopia, where ‘to each his own’ is the law of the land.  Live and let live.  Where men are created equal.  I just don’t know where’s the harm in letting people live their own life how they want to live their own life?  Who am I, who are you, who’s the government to step in and tell people how to live, who to love, what to be?

The One true God? Really?

My favorite keep-my-sanity-while-driving-in-traffic radio talk show has been having an on going discussion on faith, and heaven. Is there a God, is there a heaven, what proof is there. Click on the link and listen to the audio post “Faith”.

I know that I’m not giving this a proper introduction and there fore I’m going to jack this whole thing up, bear with me.

We believe in God, Jesus, Heaven because that’s the religion we were raised with. Muslims have their belief system because that’s how they were raised. Buddhists believe how they were raised and so on and so one. And every one of them believes they are the right way and the rest of the world is wrong.

I am the way the truth and the life, no one comes to The Father except through Me. John 14:6

Our justification that our way is the one true way and everyone who doesn’t believe in God the Father, will burn in hell.

So I come to this. is it possible that every religion has their own afterlife and it’s right? We don’t know what our Heaven will be like. No body does. Is it possible that our afterlife is different for every single one of us? My heaven could be a beach with endless margaritas and cabana boys. My sister’s could be 24 hour yoga. How do we know there is an afterlife? Because the bible says so? So, we now pick and choose what chapters and verses are literal and which ones are figurative?

Isn’t every religion based on the same basic principles? A higher being and an afterlife? Is it possible there is one single higher being and we all just call it by a different name?

He wants proof there is a god. Is there proof there isn’t a god? Why do we think our god is the One True God for the entire world? Is there proof there is a Heaven? What is that proof and what is it like? My afterlife could very well be as specialized for me, as yours would be for you.

Oh and lets not get started down the road of faith… believing without proof.

Equal rights for all, special privileges for none

Of course it is never my intention to offend anyone, but I somehow manage to do it without even trying.  Especially when I discuss controversial topics.  But I guess that comes with the topic, not everyone will agree.  Please, just don’t take this personally, it’s just me spouting an opinion.

Good, not that I’ve got that disclaimer out of the way….

On the AM talk radio show I listen to on my way to work, they were discussing the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy.  A man called in to voice his opinion on gays in the military.  He said that in the military they are trained to function as a unit.  Every man (person) covering everyone else to protect everyone in the unit to the best of their ability, especially in a combat situation.  He went on to say “I don’t want to be in a combat unit where one guy is going to protect some guys better than others just because he’s attracted to them.”

At that point I decided that person was a total idiot.  Why? (this list is in it’s simplest form.  I understand on many levels the military is different than any other job, but doesn’t there have to be some basic level of rules/regulations that apply to every employer/job?)

• In it’s simplest forms, the military is just like any other job. It’s just that, a job.
• I don’t know of any other job where sexual preference can get you fired.  That sounds a whole lot like discrimination.
• In a combat situation I find it truly hard to believe that with the enemy attacking you your mind will be on who’s got the cutest ass, and who you’d like to bunk with.  I  mean, I can not remember a time ever in my life when I was in a stressful situation and all I could think about was sex.
• What if the roles were reversed?  What if it was a woman in the unit?  Wouldn’t he be just as concerned that she couldn’t do the job as well for the same reason?  She was too busy focusing on which guy she was going to get naked with later?
• Or, would a  man protect her more because he was attracted to her, or less because she had turned him down.

I guess I just kind of want to know, why does sexual orientation, sexual gender, sexual preference have to come into play here.

Equal rights for all; Special privileges for none                ~Thomas Jefferson

That doesn’t just apply to gays in the military. It applies for everyone.  We should all have the same rights, live by the same rules.  The Declaration of Independence says

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

When did we lose sight of that?  When did we forget that?

I had a conversation with my brother who is a member of the military (AIM HIGH) about this. He told me there are many levels about this policy that he is not at liberty to talk about.  I believe that. But at it’s basic core, I think it’s wrong.