The Issue:When I look at the words "marriage equality" I wonder why anyone should be continuing to think that being gay is a learned pattern or a choice after the people who were wrong about it originally (Masters and Johnson) had changed their opinion. I realise that it is convenient for some to make this an issue. I am writing this in response to the recent remarks on the blog of Bristol Palin. I find it ironic that the child of a Republican laughing stock should end up talking about someone else's take on discrimination and make comments to a) defend her mother and her mother's party, and b) be involved in a political discussion about families and marriage since she has neither. This is the child who we were told is off limits to discuss and who is being used by her mother's political campaign to attack the president who soundly beat her mother and her running mate, presidential hopeful and lead attack dog of the obstructionist movement in congress, John McCain.
Just like the hate from the KKK, this kind of prejudice against another section of our society, human beings that have done nothing to attack her mother for being an idiot who mouths colloquial expressions that should have made anyone with a brain stop and check themselves, apologize, and resign - which shows that Sarah Palin is a bigot. We don't have hear her say it, she is being reverberated through the ramblings of one of her offspring who attacked president Obama for speaking out in favor of same sex couples being married. I don't understand being gay because I am not gay, but that doesn't mean that I believe that gay people should be denied the right to the same legal rights of everyone else in America.
The Big ArgumentThere is always someone who opposes anything that he doesn't understand and that isn't someone who developed critical thinking. The idea that their "savior" whom they continue to call "Jesus", not realizing he was a Middle Eastern Jew who was a reformer who was anti-religion, some have fashioned their own religion supposedly about his teachings. I could go on about the fact that the letter J wasn't present in any form of language of that time period, but that would detract from the actual argument. The leader and savior of their religion taught that love was the way. He, like the Buddha in India, walked the earth on a pilgrimage to teach people the evils of religion and that they needed to quit following dogma and start loving each other without restrictions on "types" of people. He said that it would be easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than a rich man to get into heaven.
But his supposed followers took what he said about being against religion and made a religion out of it. Then they arranged it so rich men could profit from investing in it. They started teaching a priority system. It goes like this; God is above the church, the church is above man, rich men are above poor men, men are above females, and Christians are superior to everyone else. And this hate filled message, straight from a person who fathered a child out of wedlock is being spread by someone who is attacking someone who is an actual family man with children of his own, who is married and lives in the sanctity of a real "traditional family" for being open minded enough to realize that marriage should be a right in the United States for everyone who pays taxes. The movie "Chuck and Larry" that scoffed at the idea that someone would actually get married for insurance purposes showed what a fiasco that would turn out to be. But the first words out of the mouth of most conservatives when asked about their objections to gay marriage is that some of the rights and privileges that they enjoy, like insurance family plans could possibly be available to someone who could fake it for that reason.
It makes me wonder how anyone can call themselves a Christian and then practice the hate of another human being based on their sexual orientation. That isn't what Yeshua (Jesus to European-ized Christians who still use the "Latinization" of the name) would condone this continued prejudice against anyone is ridiculous. I will fight discrimination against anyone based on being who they are no matter what the situation. I will defend the president's right to have his opinion and I happen to agree with it in this instance. I also find it distasteful that the Palins use the child that was off limits to criticism to criticize anyone they have a political rivalry with. If she is off limits to criticism from the other party then she should keep to herself the political propaganda beaten into her by her mother. I guess hypocrisy is hereditary in some cases.