Thursday, July 8, 2010

Defense of Marriage Act under fire

Finally.

Another person in power with the guts (and according to conservatives, the appropriate esteem for the Adversary) to confirm that homosexuals are human beings.

My question: Why did this take so long after Theodore Olson's triumph of logic: The Conservative Case for Gay Marriage?

Naturally, the standard conservitive argument was there to criticize the valor of Judge Joseph L. Tauro of United States District Court in Boston :

"Chris Gacek, a senior fellow at the Family Research Council, a leading conservative group, said he was disappointed by the decision.

“The idea that a court can say that this definition of marriage that’s been around forever is irrational is mind-boggling,” Mr. Gacek said. “It’s a bad decision.”"

Once again for all the world to see, we have the usual conservative argument: It's always been this way! Why change it?

Yes. Because when oppressing people different from you, the idea of tradition is more important than pesky questions of human rights and American equality.

Its amusing to think that if our nation embraced all of its traditions, Chris Gacek would have worked in a coal mine by the time he was six years old, and would have died before the age of 15. Yes. Those were the good ole' days. Unless of course, his parents were rich.

People thought the world was flat for quite a long time, too. Oh! Oh! I can see Mr. Gacek in the trails against Galileo:

"The idea that this man can say that this definition of a earth-centered universe is irrational is mind-boggling," Ser Gacek said. "It's a bad decision."

Anyway, we all know the "definition" he is talking about is the one given in the Bible. I like how the ignorant religious try to hide the fact they are talking about God now. Why bother?

For a secular argument: Not everyone is a Christian, Mr. Gacek, and non-Abrahamic religions get married, too. So your fucking definition of marriage doesn't mean shit. But hey, if people could see their own ethnocentrism, we wouldn't be in America, or on Earth. As a side note, ethnocentrism is a neutral term, so I am consistently guilty of it myself; though mine doesn't seek to harm my fellow humanity. Why are the cruel so often the biggest advocates of God?

This leads into a religious argument: God is the supreme good. Lord of Mercy. The idea that He would bless the persecution of human beings whom are doing nothing else but living happily together is pure folly. Do you honestly think that when your eyes reopen upon the Last Day, God is going to walk over and fist bump you for blocking financial benefits for homosexual unions?
You might want to reread your precious books.

Or better yet, read the most recent divine publication: the Quran. You Christians realize its from the same God you supposedly worship, don't you? It's worth a read, especially since most of you are actually polytheists in His eye.

And before you go into "But the Quran isn't real!", I encourage you to remember that is what everyone says about YOUR books. Since God states in the Quran, quite plainly, that all three Scriptures are Truth and viable, you don't have anything to lose.

To summarize God's message: If you are being wronged, you can bring Justice to the Evil. If you are not being wronged, then its between those people and God, and mind your own fucking business.

Homosexuals are not a threat to anybody. Maybe you should stop using God as a validation for your homophobia. You might come to regret it.

P.S.: The logical fix for the Defense of Marriage Act is to make it apply to all marriages, not just heterosexual ones.

No comments:

Post a Comment