Sunday, August 8, 2010

9th Post - Go to Hell, Bishop Jackson

This post is in response to this article:

Now, full disclaimer on my part...I don't like religion, and I am a full supporter of gay rights. So let the tearing apart commence.

italicized text = Bishop Jackson's points
normal text = my points

"The institution of marriage is unique. It is the one institution that binds women and men together to form a family, and this serves broad societal purposes."
-->Agreed. The institution of marriage is unique and is very important to society. It does create families, and serves broad societal purposes, but how these purposes become ruined when the partners of a marriage are the same sex is still something that, to me, cannot be proved in any sane way.

"The majority of Californians, including two-thirds of the state's black voters, have just had their core civil right -- the right to vote -- stripped from them by an openly gay federal judge who has misread history and the Constitution to impose his views on the state's people."

-->Well now we have issues. Sure, 52%, which was the "majority" that passed Prop 8 is a legal majority. But it's a TINY majority, and of course not every registered voter in the state voted. And I also believe that if the 16 and 17 year olds were allowed to vote, the majority would have swung the other way. We are still seeing a generation gap in the voting process, and soon enough, that gap will be gone. I also find it interesting that within the same paragraph the black bishop brings up the numbers of black voters, and then continues to talk about civil rights. Um, are you confused? I do believe that it was federal judges and not the process of citizen voting that got blacks the right to vote they deserve, and also ended the horrid Jim Crow laws. Please review your history, sir. OH, and one more note, this "openly federal gay judge" was a Reagan appointee. Yea I am sure he is SO liberal minded.

"The implicit comparison Judge Vaughn Walker made between racism and opposition to same-sex marriage is particularly offensive to me and to all who remember the reality of Jim Crow. It is not bigotry, it is biology that discriminates between same-sex couples and opposite-sex couples."
--> I believe I already covered the idiocy of the first part of this statement. Keeping people from legal, state rights over something they cannot change is discrimination. You, Bishop, are black, and you cannot change that. That should not keep you from marrying the partner of your choice. At one point, you were not allowed to. Gay people are gay, and they cannot change that, and that should not keep them from marrying the partner of their choice. And biology? Just because a heterosexual couple has parts that fit together a little better, and that can procreate doesn't mean that is the only way to validate a loving relationship. The common points of couples who cannot conceive, single mothers/fathers, and other such families are fighting back against this idea of procreation creating a family.

"A marriage requires a husband and a wife, because these unions are necessary to make new life and connect children to their mother and father. Judge Walker's decision will not stand the test of time and history. Congress and the Supreme Court must act to protect all Americans' right to vote for marriage."

--> Once again, the bias here against families who simply do not want to have children or cannot have children is frightening. Also, many gay/lesbian families have a myriad of options to have children. Adoption, surrogacy, and sperm donors, there is nothing wrong with these options! In fact, let's take a quick look at the upside. Adoption = less children who don't have families. Surrogacy = a great way for a couple to have a child of their own, while providing a job for a woman who enjoys pregnancy. Sperm donors = well, all that sperm is just sitting there doing nothing... And honestly Bishop Jackson, you don't believe this will stand the test of time? This exact statement was also uttered by people who didn't want women to have the right to vote, one of their main concerns being how the Bible taught that women were not of equal stature to men. It was uttered by people who did not believe that your race should have the right to vote, to not be property, and not have the right to marry who they choose, one of their main pieces of evidence being that the Bible clearly taught them that there was a superior race. I believe the solutions to those problems stood the test of time Bishop, and you should be thankful for it, as I am.

And I understand, Bishop, that your Bible tells you that heterosexual marriage is the only type of marriage. But you need to understand several things you obviously don't: 1) The Bible was written by man, in a time where things were taught very differently than now. 2) Our founding fathers were beyond clear that our founding documents such as the Declaration of Independence and Constitution were in no way based upon a religious ideology, and that they enforce the separation of government created laws and free will of people to practice their own beliefs. 3) Those founding documents stress the equality of all citizens.

I think it is time that you Bishop, open up a book other than the Bible or Texas created textbook and learn about the history of civil rights, including the part about your own race, and how once civil rights are expanded, the United States becomes more of the democracy it is meant to be.

No comments:

Post a Comment