July 2004 Archives
The Democratic Platform states that ""We support full inclusion of gay and lesbian families in the life of our nation and seek equal responsibilities, benefits, and protections for these families." That's all well and good and I'm supposed to feel included, but your nominee supports discriminating against gay and lesbian couples in his own home state. At least that's what he said. Now either he's being discriminatory, or he's being sly. I don't like Bush for those two reasons.
Update on the Petition Man: This was reported by the Akron Beacon Journal: "Signature solicitors are removed from fair." I suppose the title of that article could be taken two different ways, but it meant that those anti-gay folks were "bounced" from the Summit County Fair by the sheriff. Solicitation is not allowed at the county fair per Ohio law unless one buys a booth, and then they can only go 4 feet away while soliciting. Hmm.. perhaps if they all could only go 4 feet from their churches...
Today after work I went to dinner with my mom and sister. We had a nice dinner and as always a good time in each others company. I love my family! On our way out the door we were stopped by a man carrying a clip board. As we were close to my store, I knew exactly who it was. I knew what was about to happen. He blurted out, "Are you registered voters? We're doing a petition to ban gay marriage in Ohio!" My family turned on him.
My mom yelled something like, "No way! Get away from us!" and I think my sister told him to get a life. I got in the car quickly and we left. I don't recall saying anything to him myself - I just wanted to get us away from his bullshit. I hurt inside that my family had to deal with this man who personified the people who don't like me. I don't want them to have to deal with the crap that I do. For me, that was the worst part of it. My family was exposed to this hate in a personal way.
After my mom left I had to go back back to the parking lot to confront this man. My sister, being the protective person that she is, insisted that she return with me. When we first got there I told her to stay in the car. If this guy started going off, I really didn't want her to have to deal with the things he might say. He again approached me while I was in my car, apparently not remembering me from a few minutes ago. Again he blurted out his request.
I was civil. I didn't yell or make nasty remarks. Why is the question I have for these people, and it seems to be the most difficult for them to answer. He could provide no concrete explanation, and the reasons he gave made no sense or were lies. He said that Ohio has no laws banning gay marriage. I corrected him. He claimed that the amendment wouldn't affect private legal arrangements between two unmarried people. I pointed him to Virginia. When we asked why we really needed it, he spoke of ancient Greece. In the end, I refused to sign his petition and asked if he had spoken with any gay people about how this might affect them. He mumbled a bit as he lied. I told him that he just had, and then he walked away.
I had my camera with me and so I took a picture of him doing his thing from about 30-40 feet away. We then went back into the restaurant to let them know that this man was out there, and what he was doing. When we came out, he was standing right up against my sister's car looking in the back window. I thought I saw him writing something, but I'm not sure. Maybe he was clutching his fanny pack. My sister then left and I stayed just to see how many people he was speaking to and what their reactions were. A few people signed, but many walked away. One shook his head in disgust.
The man the wandered back over to my car and asked if he could take my picture. As I was in a public place and had taken his picture, I told him to go right ahead. Later I wondered what he would do with that picture. There's really nothing he can do. I'm out - it's not like he's going to surprise anyone by outing me. And I wondered will he pass it around a room saying, "Look at this homosexual. He's driving his car!" I also wondered what he was doing at my sister's car. Was he trying to figure out who we were? That spooked me a bit until I made a visit to my friendly local police station.
The most lasting thing from this wasn't the discussion we had with him when we returned. It wasn't that he was creepy and looking around our cars. It was that my family had to see this side of my life. I know they see it in the news, but to see it personally and how it affected me makes me sad. I don't want them to worry about me, or about the things I will encounter in my life.
I didn't see the convention last night on TV, but I read the speech by Barack Obama. After reading it I searched for video of it and watched it intensely. The man is so full of passion and hope and faith in America it is infectious. It made me feel better that there are people out there who feel the optimism that make our country what it was meant to be, not what it has been made into. I know others have already blogged about him and I hate to duplicate, but the speech spoke to me, and renewed my sometimes waning hope and faith in our country.
One of the comments he made that I really connected with was about being your "brother's keeper". He spoke of the concept that we are one people, who care about other people because it is in our nature. It is part of being American.
For alongside our famous individualism, there's another ingredient in the American saga. A belief that we are all connected as one people.
If there's a child on the South Side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child.
If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for their prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandparent.
If there's an Arab-American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties.
It is that fundamental belief -- it is that fundamental belief -- I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper -- that makes this country work.
It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family. "E pluribus unum." Out of many, one.
That is exactly how I feel. That is exactly why we need new leadership - to help bring that ideal back into focus. That is why I don't want George Bush in the White House any more. And that is why I still have hope for better days.
(Thanks to The Tin Man for the link to the speech.)
A few days ago we received a phone call at work from a person who wanted to solicit signatures for a petition to enshrine a gay marriage ban in the Ohio Constitution. We informed them that they would not be allowed to do that on our property as we have a no solicitation policy. They called again shortly afterwards and we again informed them of our policy. Today they came anyway. When told to leave our property they insisted that they could be there because of a piece of paper that was in their car. Unfortunately for them, our store has a piece of paper that says we own that property, and because it is private property we have the right to ask people to leave. They did finally leave after the store manager approached them. God was looking out for me today when it just so happened I have the day off.
The past few days at work have had some interesting moments. Over the weekend a woman was found cleaning the store. She started in the toy clearance aisle, moved to the Barbie aisle and then one more aisle in toys. Yes, she zoned the whole thing. And this was not just moving a few things around - she was on her hands and knees working the bottom shelves. Afterwards we lost track of her in the chemicals area.
In other news, a man was too lazy to go to the fitting room to try on a pair of pants so he changed them in the middle of the men's department. One of my coworkers was walking by and there was this man in the middle of the store in his underwear. Things shouldn't surprise me...
And last night as I went into the men's room a man who was in the last stall made a noise that I don't think I can really reproduce in type. Suffice it to say it must have been a good one. Thank goodness I have today off.
This weekend I saw a number of garage sales going on. Except that they really weren't garage sales, they were yard sales. Why do people insist on calling it a garage sale even when they don't have a garage? And while I'm a it, why not just call it a crap sale, or a shit sale even? They're not actually selling their garage or their yard, they're selling their crap. So why not just be direct about it and call it a crap sale? But then all those people who go from sale to sale would be called crappers. I suppose it wouldn't work.
Thank goodness I don't live in Jamaica. Supposedly reflecting the 96% of people against gay rights, there are several musicians from that little place who advocate killing gays and lesbians. One such singer was allegedly one of a group of people that broke into a house and beat the occupants up while yelling homophobic epithets. This singer has a song that includes something about threatening gay men with a gunshot to the head.
Another singer, Beenie Man, is coming to the USA in August to spread his message of hate and murder. His tour in Belgium was cancelled because the organizer did not want the homophobic message at his festival. I'm appalled that there are companies in the US who are sponsoring and promoting this guy. Mr. Man claims that his music reflects the culture of Jamaica. How sad. Even the right-wingers in this country aren't advocating execution of gays. Not directly anyway...
Hate and homophobia that go unchecked are like unbridled power. Power corrupts, etc. It starts out simply as a point of view, then becomes something entirely different like violence. No one can claim it doesn't happen here. There are hundreds of hate crimes against gay and lesbian folks in this country every year. What messages did the two men who killed Matthew Shepard hear? The messages of the right-wing people aren't helping. You know the ones about "God hates fags" and "Fags are sinners." I think this should sound a wake-up to both sides of gay issues. The GLBT community can't let this crap go unchallenged, and for those anti-gay folks there are consequences of your rhetoric. People get hurt. People get killed.
The other lesson from this is if you're queer, don't travel to Jamaica any time in the near future.
PS. The title of my post, Beenie Weenie, bears no reference to the lovely food product of the same name. I used to love Beenie Weenie when I was a kid. Hmm...
(sources: 'Kill Gays' Singer To Begin US Tour, Police seek Jamaican singer after armed attack on gay men, Bounty Killer concert cancelled - Buju Banton next)
A friend of mine at work told this story: He was working back by the music department when a woman approached him asking for some advice. She wanted to buy a CD for a friend. "He's on the verge of suicide. Could you recommend a CD for him? Preferably something without mention of love or relationships..." What album would you recommend?
The Marriage Protection Act of 2004 (H.B. 3313) passed in the House of Representatives. Basically, they are trying to keep any court from ruling the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional. This is bad for 2 reasons. I was always taught that our government was divided into three branches, and that was the system of checks and balances. This was so that no one branch of government would become all powerful and corrupt. This new law would seem to circumvent the basic structure and concept of our government. It is rather scary that 233 of our representatives voted in favor of this, just on those grounds.
Now, the fact that they went and did this is ridiculous. Are they really protecting marriage? No, they're protecting themselves from an onslaught from the religious right. It should really be called the "Protecting My Self-Serving Ass Act." At least then it would be more accurate. And the effect is that it takes away gay and lesbians' right to address grievances against our government. Hmm... Didn't our forefathers revolt at one point with that being one of the reasons? Perhaps a revolt is in order. Or perhaps we'll just redecorate.
By the way, thank you again to Sherrod Brown of Ohio for standing up for gay and lesbian constituants and voting "no" on this bill.
(sources: Text of HB 3313, How they voted on HB 3313, Lambda Legal)
A woman came in today about 30 minutes before my shift was about to end, and she just topped off a lovely day. I went in early today and worked a long day. She had to pick the end of the day to make a situation. She wanted to return a bunch of stuff, no receipt. I told what we could do for her, but none of those options would work for her. Then she said, "You think I stole this!" WHAT? I love how people jump to their own conclusions, and no matter how erroneous they are, suddenly they are fact. She proceeded to make a scene, during which I assured her I had said no such thing, and the thought hadn't even crossed my mind. Then after that debacle, she began to question me as to why she needed a receipt to return something. At that point I ended the discussion. Perhaps that was rude of me, but if you don't know why you might need a receipt for something, then there's really nothing I can do. The IRS has required receipt retention for how many years now? This isn't a foreign concept. She informed me that the attorney general would be contacting me. Good. I have a few things I'd like to say to him anyway.
What's next? Some day someone's going to come in and try to return food that they threw up. Then maybe they'll call the surgeon general.
Queer as Folk has had some interesting lines about gay marriage in the past few weeks. Last week Michael summed it by saying, "It's also our god given right to have everything that straight people have, because we're every bit as much human as they are." (listen here)
This week Debbie was at US Customs coming back from Canada, and they wouldn't let Michael and Ben come back into the country as a couple. This was her comment:
(Customs Man) "As I explained to your son, the governmet of the United States doesn't recognize gays getting married."
(Debbie) "But you do recognize Britney Spears getting loaded and married one night and having it annulled the next morning. Or two total strangers getting married for a million fucking bucks on television. Is that the sanctity of marriage you assholes are protecting?" (listen here)
While Queer as Folk has no one position on gay marriage (they represent several views of relationships), I think Debbie said it best.
Yahoo! News - Crazed surgeon amputates patient's penis, chops it up
Now that's something you don't see on ER is it?
On the heels of the defeat of the Federal Marriage Amendment, our government is at it again. The House of Representatives is scheduled to vote next week (week of July 19) on the Marriage Protection Act. This one is not like the FMA - this one will not rewrite the Constitution, but will remove one of the checks and balances from the equation - the federal courts. H.R. 3313 (Marriage Protection Act) will remove the Defense of Marriage Act, signed by Clinton in 1996, from the jurisdiction of the federal courts. This means that if a couple is married in Massachusetts then moves to Ohio, they would not be able to sue the state for not recognizing their marriage. Doesn't this sound like a scary thing? If Congress takes the courts out of the picture for this law, what will be next? What would have happened if Congress had removed segregation laws from the reach of the courts? We would still be living in the dark ages as far as human rights are concerned. (Although I often wonder).
In my opinion, the courts are there to protect our human rights and civil liberties from the executive and legislative branches that are more prone to politicking and self-serving policies. It will be a sad day in America when the basic structure of our government is disassembled for the most conservative voices in the country. They say that gay marriage is the biggest threat to the institution of marriage, but as I see it, the religious right and their minions are the biggest threat to democracy of the new century. Which is it folks? Gay marriage or theocracy?
Start calling House Representatives...
(sources: House bill blocks courts on gay marriage, HRC: HOUSE MARKS UP THREE BILLS AFFECTING GLBT COMMUNITY)
Europe study: Gay unions don't hurt society
Among other things, the study presents facts about the marriage trends, and how that data is used against gay marriage. Just so happens that I wrote about virtually the same thing a few days ago when rebutting some of Dobson's stuff. They take the decline in marriage and can correlate it to anything... divorce and dandruff...
I just got home from work and saw the results of today's Senate vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment. The proponents of the discriminatory amendment didn't even manage to get a majority, let alone the 60 votes needed to move it along. I'm so happy that the amendment failed, although I know this fight isn't yet over.
Speaking of the fight, I can't wait until my senators (from Ohio) run for office again. Senators DeWine and Voinovich both voted for the amendment. I will never vote for them again, and I will do my best to make sure others vote against them as well. I did notice that McCain voted against it. Bush must be seeing red...
To see how your senator voted today, click here. (It's roll call 155 should you need to choose which one)
[This entry continues my review and analysis of the book Marriage Under Fire by James Dobson. I should preface this with the fact that part 2 focuses on a section of one chapter of the book, and not the work in its entirety. Future analysis may be more general and less focused on details that make up the argument. There are still more arguments to be considered.]
Marriage Under Fire begins with God's creation of marriage. It is the finest of His creations in the eyes of the author. Dobson talks about the human instinct for bonding with another person, as well as discusses the ramifications of gay marriage-like relationships in Norway.
The argument has been made before that civilization is founded on marriage, and James Dobson makes the same argument. He states that "God announced the ordination of the family long before he established the two other great human institutions, the church and the government." (pg 7) While this may be scripturally true, I thought that there were other important things that civilization was founded upon - things like freedom, democracy, and inherent human rights. He argues that among heterosexual men and women there is a desire to leave their parents and "cleave" unto one another. This is not in dispute, but the fact is that many gay and lesbian people also desire to leave their parents and be in a relationship with another person.
Here begins my journey with the James Dobson book Marriage Under Fire. I stopped by Borders on the way home from work today looking for some interesting reading. Don't get me wrong - I love reading all my favorite blogs and other stuff online. But sometimes you just want a book in your hands. I'd been thinking about reading this book for a few reasons. I want to see what they're saying. "Know thine enemy..." For some strange reason I want to know what rhetoric is being used against me. Perhaps it's so that I can be prepared for it. Which leads me to my second reason for reading the book.
I want my beliefs to be challenged. We're going to assume for the moment that Dr. James Dobson is an expert on why gay marriages should not be made legal, and so I'm going to assume that he would make the best argument for his position. I'm a firm believer that while I may feel very strongly about my beliefs and certainly think that I am right, I always maintain that I may be wrong. There may be inconsistencies in my logic that have escaped me. I don't argue my point like I'm wrong, but I keep my mind open enough to entertain other thoughts and ideas. So I'm hoping this book will put my beliefs to the test. If I'm wrong I'll find out. If I'm right, I'll be that much stronger in my belief and argument.
Let's start right at the beginning. I found the book in the "Religion: Practical" section. I picked the book up to take a closer look - it was smaller than I thought it would be. Perhaps this is to facilitate carrying it in a pocket should one need to do so. It was also about $10. I hope that went towards the electric bill at Borders... but I know otherwise. As I checked out I felt embarrassed. That's ironic in and of itself. When I was first coming out I would get so anxious about buying or checking our books about gay topics. Now it's the other way around. I know I shouldn't be embarrassed, but that's honestly what I felt. So there's step one... I bought it, it's mine, and now I have to start reading.
I was listening to George Carlin on Air America's The Majority Report when he made the comment that the right is more interested in property while the left is more interested in human issues. I tend to agree with that, but then I'm biased. He also accurately observed that the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is how they arrange the furniture. It's really all the same crap, just different ways of arranging things. For instance, Bush is against gay marriage while Kerry spouts that it should be "left up to the states." What kind of bullshit is that? HRC endorses Kerry, and I think he'll be a better preseident than W, but it's a matter of putting the chair in the corner rather than in the closet. Just different furniture arrangement...
In the next to last episode of the season of Queer as Folk, Ben proposed to Michael. Michael took some time before saying yes, not sure yet if it was what he really wanted. He made the comment though that queer people have the god given right to everything straight people have, and that "we're every bit as human as they are." That resounded in my mind for a bit, because it's really at the heart of the issue. It's not about the politcs and the rights and bull - it's about the fact that we're really all the same, and we all deserve to be happy. Of course Michael said yes to Ben and since they were in Toronto, Canada (where they have equality, not just BS about it like in a certain other country I know of) they went ahead and got married. That scene was very touching, and made me think a bit more about when I am going to get married. Perhaps more on that later...
Well worth reading, this demonstrates how the Patriot Act is affecting real people. I occasionally wonder what I'm doing that might make someone believe that I'm suspect of something. I don't like the thought being afraid of my government - the one that I pay for. Next time I go out with my camera I'm sure I'll think of this... and next time a congressperson votes on the Patriot Act, I hope they will too.
(Thanks to Ron for posting the link)
I heard an interview with President Clinton today. He was speaking about some of the tactics used by the extreme right, and for some reason I thought about how they related to outing. Chris (of Law Dork) writes that "Perhaps an honest look at outing would reveal that . . . it is partially about the anger of those who have 'come out' ." I think that's very true. Clinton mentioned that anger is a wonderful tool for energizing your base, but it's a lousy instrument for convincing someone who's on the fence. So how does anger positively affect an issue when the tool is outing? The public who may be undecided on the issue see the outed person and focus on the personal scandal, not the issue. Instead of being educated about what matters, they get someone's personal struggle gone Jerry Springer. Seems to me that would be embarrassing for the GLBT community.
Clinton said when we focus on the people who are putting forth policies that we don't agree with we lose sight of the issue itself. So when we out someone, such as a politician, we're doing ourselves a disservice. The issue then becomes about that person's sexual orientation, not the issue itself. I don't want to talk about Senator Soandso's private life - I don't care. What I do care about is the policies that affect my life.
Anger can be very useful - it can drive you to make a difference. Anger itself is not good or bad, but what you funnel that emotion into can be potentially destructive. And I think the gay community will be setting itself up to fail if we make an issue of closeted politicians. The Federal Marriage Amendment has people angry and scared, but the solution is not to back into a corner and hiss. What we need is to take that anger and create something better out of it. The right uses fear to make things happen; I don't want the gay community to resort to emotional outbursts and tactics as well.
I spent the majority of today painting inside our house. It was both frustrating and rewarding at the same time. First of all I must ask who names the paint colors? I think a hungry person must have that task because so many of the colors relate to food. "Peach Sorbet" "Razz Berry" "Fruit Shake" Today I painted with "Swiss Coffee." (I guess Swiss Coffee is white.) Which leads me to my second point - painting white over white is quite frustrating. You do all that work and it still looks the same. The moment the brush passes the painted spot, it is undecernable from the rest of the wall. (except that it's wet which leads to my highlights - more on that in a bit) The last color we painted with was a deep blue. I'm not sure what food group it belonged to, but it looks really sharp. And at the end of the day, the hallway, a bedroom, and one wall of another room is done. And the paint in my hair looks like a bad attempt at highlights, but maybe I'll just leave it there and start a trend. (and then again maybe not...)
OUTING: ('au-ti[ng]) To forcibly disclose another person's sexual orientation to the public. ie. Senator Soandso is a closeted gay man. He chooses to not be out, but someone else decides he should be out so they go to the press and make an announcement.
I am firmly opposed to the practice of outing. I have been against it to the point of disagreeing with GLBT spokespeople who hold it up as the cure for our community's problems. I simply think that it is a personal choice, made on an individual basis, and depending on the circumstances.
My friend Dan and I have spoken about the "gay rights movement," and how it is affecting society. Mass ad campaigns, political lobbying, etc. They all make a difference, but the real difference is made on a personal level. Education happens at its best when it's one on one. So I can understand the desire for GLBT people to see more queer folks coming out. The more that are out, the more straight people know that we are a part of life, and aren't a part of some "homosexual agenda."
But I don't see the point of forcing people to come out before they are ready. What kind of difference are they going to make once they are out prematurely? Are they going to promote a positive view of being gay or is it more likely that there will be something unhealthy about it? If a person is struggling with their own sexuality in some way that prevents them from being out, making that struggle public isn't going to help anyone.
Circumstances can make for an unhealthy situation as well. If someone is closeted at work, but has to be so that he/she can remain employed, is that really wrong? Besides, if a person gets where they need to be financially, when they come out they will be in a better position to help the community. There are also situations where physical harm could come from being out, there is no reason to unnecessarily subject oneself to injury.
Some argue that in some cases the community must out people when they are in a position that they could help advance civil causes, or when the views they promote are antithetical to the equal rights movement. In many cases we do this when someone who rallies against adultery is guilty of the very thing they preach against. If information is already public then it's fair game. If Senator Soandso walks around holding hands with his partner then really he's already out (at least to some extent). For those who are truely in the closet, however, forcing a personal decision on them is wrong.
Part of being American is having individual freedoms, and to take that choice away from someone denies them the liberty to not disclose personal information. Even in court you have the right not to testify against yourself. Before Lawrence vs. Texas (the sodomy law that was challenged) the government had the right to step into someone's own bedroom and tell them what they could and could not do. That was wrong, and outing is on that same level. Although I may feel that someone deserves to be outed (and I do think that sometimes), the basis of my feeling is not justification for me to deprive someone of their privacy. It's like the religious right taking away the rights my partner and I have as a couple on the basis that they feel our relationship is wrong. We must not display the same behaviors that we fight against; to do so would undermine our cause and our character.
We have a new visitor in our pond today. Actually, we think he (or she) arrived yesterday. It's a little frog that seems quite content hanging out among the lillies and water hyacinths. Of course I took a few photos of our new friend. Hope he enjoys his stay at Veronica Lake East.
On the way home from some errands this evening I noticed that I am becoming increasingly irritated with bad drivers, especially the tailgaters. Nothing like looking in your rear view mirror and seeing only the top portion of a car and knowing it is milliseconds from smashing the back end of your car should you need to stop. This woman tailed me for a few miles this evening, almost making me want to scream out the window. I even turned my hazards on for a moment thinking that might get her to back off. It's not like I was driving slowly - 45-50mph. I guess wherever she was going was more important than being safe on the road. To think we put our lives in other peoples' hands everyday in this manner - it's scary when you consider the little brain power it takes to get a drivers license. Heck at work I see people who can't push a shopping cart without running into crap.
Today a woman wanted to return a Sony Playstation without a receipt. She claimed that she had bought it 2 months ago. Funny thing was that her kid ratted her out. She said, "No, you bought it in January!" Way to go kid! Then she also had a game that she claimed wasn't working. Turns out it had peanut butter on it. Yeah, usually computer games don't work well after you've made a sandwich out of them. She was irate though, and threatened to call my supervisor. As President Bush says, bring it on...
Bush is out extolling the virtues of America. He's been praising the troops for their sacrifice and hard work, but wasn't he the one who wanted to reduce their pay and benefits? Amazing how he can say one thing and do another. He says that America is "the world's foremost champion of liberty." Well, we were until the Bush administration got the Patriot Act going and started attacking countries for no valid reason. Now we are headed by the world's formost liar, and we are the champions of misleading information.
Apparently Bush's flight today was delayed by an engine failure. It caused him to miss church with conservative evangelicals. Perhaps it was god's will...
(source: Bush Extols American 'Values' in West Virginia)
Last night we caught a little bit of The Birdcage on TBS. They like to change words that they find offensive. At one point someone says that this guy is hung. Instead TBS voices over "hankered." So instead of kids hearing something that probably won't make sense to them, they hear something totally nonsensical. I need to make a note to myself not to watch movies on TBS. It's almost frustrating.
Today was a busy day. My family came over for dinner, and stayed to go see the fireworks. It was strange because the fireworks started and then abruptly stopped. And it wasn't a momentary pause - it seemed like they were over. On the way home they started again of course so we found another spot to watch them. It ended up being a better spot anyway. (We were standing out on the dike.)
The fireworks were ok, but the best part of the day was having my family here at the house. My mom and dad were here as well as my sister and her husband. I really like having them here - fills the house with a sense of home. I'm so lucky to have my family.
15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability. - from the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
XIV - Citizen rights not to be abridged Passed by Congress June 13, 1866. Ratified July 9, 1868 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor to deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. - United States Consitution(emphasis mine)
(sources: Canadian Charter; Constitution of the United States)
Focus on the Family Action, a legally independent political arm of Focus on the Family, has taken out newspaper ads in swing states such as North and South Dakota, Indiana and Ohio. The ads are anti-gay marriage, and encourage people to contact their senators to vote for the Federal Marriage Amendment. I'm not going to go into all the reasons why FMA is bad. Apparently the Senate is going to vote in early July sometime about whether or not to write discrimination into the Constitution for the first time.
The ad itself is pretty mindless. It plays on fear by stating that "homosexual marriage could be coming to [your state] - and sooner than you think." Yeah, the queers are going to catch you by surprise, get married, and redecorate the entire state before you can say "Hail Mary!" It purports that the "bottom line" here is that gays are out to intentionally create motherless or fatherless families. Actually, the bottom line is that LGBT people are deserving of equal rights under the law, and that we are trying to create families period. In addition, there is no evidence that children of straight parents end up better off than those of gay and lesbian parents.
The ad ends with a paragraph that states that we should make "senators as smart as a kid." Actually, I prefer my senators to be well-educated adults. Shouting "MINE MINE MINE" over marriage is more kid-like though, I would think.
By the way, thank you to FOTF for the phone numbers for my senators. I'll be calling them right away.
Today at the service desk I spoke with an odd guy. He kept insisting that he was going to get his way, and the whole time he had this beady stare. When I told him I couldn't hold his merchandise he explained "what if I put it in my garage and hit it with the car?" Umm.. what if the sun turns into a bran muffin tomorrow? What? Finally he leaned over the counter towards me (at which point I stepped back where he couldn't reach me) and said "I won't cause a scene... but I'll be back tomorrow." Umm.. scary man.
And just as I was clocking out another code brown was discovered. Ah, but this was not in the restroom. It was in one of our main aisles. I don't want to know what happened; all I know is it was my cue to go home.
Just wanted to say Happy Canada Day to our neighbors to our north. Americans should be thankful and grateful to have a neighbor such as Canada.
