I’m just so tired of bigotry. Right down to my bones. I’m tired of tolerating it, I’m tired of respecting it, I’m tired of the harm it does to my friends, family and fellow Americans. I’m tired of its existence.
If your’e a bigot, forget it. I’m done. I’m too old for this shit and I’ve seen too much to ignore it.
If you want to keep your gay friends and neighbors down, I don’t want to know you. I’m not your friend. I’m not you pal. I will not vote for you, I will not lend you my lawnmower, I will not come to your birthday party. Because you are a bad person.
No, I’m not going to punch you in the face. And yes I can separate my professional relationships from my personal ones. But if you think you can hold such positions and expect me to smile in your face in a social situation, think again.
Change. That’s what I want you to do. Wake the fuck up. Find your brain, find your heart and stop stepping on the throats of people who do you no harm.
If you think you can get some kind of cover by pretending that it’s all because of your religion, I’m not buying it. Not that I personally give a shit what your scripture or your clergy have to say on the issue, but I’m not even buying it as an excuse for believers. Your bible says lots of things that you ignore. Tons. Shitloads. Things that you somehow figure out a way around. Things that you don’t seem to be so strict about.
I don’t see you stoning adulterers in the street. Or people who work on Saturday. Or disrespectful children. And I’m sure I’ve seen you eat shellfish on occasion. Somehow you’ve figured out that those things are anachronistic, not relevant, not meant for us in the modern world. But gay people? Now that’s something that you absolutely cannot deviate from. Sure thing.
You’re just homophobic bigots hiding behind your religion. The end.
I’m done with the lot of you. Let me know when you’re ready to repent and ask for forgiveness.
You’re living in the wrong state. Come back to California! You’ve got at least one person here who agrees with you (not on everything, but definitely on this)
Well said, Scott, well said.
Spot on!
The barriers that religions throw in front of human progress make my blood boil. What possible rational, facts-based argument can religion bring against gay marriage? Please tell me. I would love to hear it.
Remember what happened when California’s Proposition 8 went to court? In the cold light of a courtroom it was discovered that those who wanted to ban gay marriage didn’t actually have any evidence to present. Like, none.
http://www.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/08/17/bloom.prop.8/index.html
Their “argument” is comprised of bigotry in its purest form and seemingly nothing else.
Great Article summarizing Prop 8. I shudder to think of what the outcome of a conservative supreme court decision on this will be. Probably some sort of weirdness where they wash their hands of it and call it a “states right” issue.
Damn right! And well stated. Saw this retweeted on my twitterfeed. Have retweeted myself and put on Facebook.
Thanks, Jake!
Scott, re-read your post. Sometimes the most difficult thing to detect is bigotry within ourselves.
Sorry. I’m not falling for the whole “your unwillingness to tolerate intolerance is itself intolerant” argument.
While I agree with your overall point, John is right. You are a bigot when it comes to religion. SO AM I. That shit is so so so stupid. What’s weird is that we actually are bigots, because religion is a belief that you choose. And the definition of bigot is a person that is intolerant of any differing creed, belief or opinion. Being gay isn’t really a creed, belief or opinion. I think it’s perfectly okay to be intollerant of creeds, beliefs and opinions. Some of those are very very stupid. So I think being a bigot is okay. But being intolerant of gays is one of those stupid ideas. I get your point, and this is all semantics, but really, I’m a bigot against asshole homophobes and religions wackos, which is okay. Those people are not bigots, because gay isn’t a belief. They’re just assholes.
My atheism really isn’t central to my point. Here’s something that is: even believers don’t have to be bigots. They find a way around other issues in their canonical texts. Slavery is one I didn’t mention above. But there’s plenty of others. I’m simply saying that one’s belief in God, or status as Christian doesn’t excuse you. You don’t get a free pass by saying “I’m not against gays I’m just for the Bible!”
And maybe it’s true that the word “bigot” isn’t the one I want. I’m open to suggestions.
I wasn’t saying you’re a bigot because you’re an athiest. Or that there’s really a tie between the two terms at all. I’m both. I think you are too. Athiest means you don’t believe in god. Bigot means you’re intollerant of somebody else’s beliefs. Both things are true of me. If somebody believes idiotic or horrible things like religious people do, by definition, I do not feel that I have to give them a pass on those things just because they fall within the realm of religion. I think you generally feel the same way. You seem to be saying so. That makes us bigots. It doesn’t make us bad.
The people you’re talking about aren’t bigots (well, most of them are, but not on this issue). They aren’t intollerant of a belief, they’re intollerant of a group of people for reasons that have nothing to do with beliefs. They’re not bigots, they’re just dickheads. Whereas you and I are bigots, but we’re not dickheads.
I just think you’re muddying the water by getting all pedantic about the definition of the word bigot. Although you may be correct, I don’t think it’s helpful.
And I think we can do better than “dickhead” to describe people who think gay people are inferior to straight people.
The government could stop recognizing marriage.
Well, I don’t like that idea for three reasons.
First, It’s never, ever going to happen. Ever.
Second, it seems bitter. Like someone throwing out all their birthday cake because they would otherwise have had to share it.
Third, it seems chickenshit in that it avoids taking any bold, controversial stands on what is essentially a civil rights issue.
You just want to be a trouble maker don’t you Scott?
“First, It’s never, ever going to happen. Ever.”
Especially with that attitude young man! Try being the little train that could.
I’m sure the same thing was said about a government of the people, for the people.
“Second, it seems bitter. Like someone throwing out all their birthday cake because they would otherwise have had to share it.”
I would prefer not to be forced to share my marriage, least of all with the government. It’s not bitter, it’s none of your business. So no, you can’t have any of my cake. My cake and I are committed to each other and ought to have a right to privacy. And damn it, don’t ask me to come into your house and share yours because I dont do that!
“Third, it seems chickenshit in that it avoids taking any bold, controversial stands on what is essentially a civil rights issue.”
Really. I’d say it’s the boldest controversial stand anyone could take at this point. 99% of the population would disagree with me to basically unseat the institution of marriage. Yet, it’s the most sensible solution. Perhaps you are just not liberal enough for the idea?
You keep on chipping away at your libertarian utopia and maybe in a hundred years polling on the whole “government shouldn’t recognize marriage” thing will crack double digits. Good luck. Me, I’m thinking about what’s feasible in the near term.
Nobody’s asking you to “share your marriage” and you know it. I’m sure there are plenty of people who, rather than see the government give gay people the same privileges they have would rather see no one get them. After all, the social and non-governmental benefits might still tip their way for a time. I just think it seems bitter and cynical. Perhaps you don’t mean it that way, but I believe it will be meant that way for a lot of people who like your idea. “If THEY have to get cake out of fairness because we have it, then perhaps nobody should have any.” Anything to prevent the icky gay people from actually gaining anything.
Hey, I have an idea. Instead of freeing black slaves let’s just make it so that it’s legal to have any color of slave. That way we’re all equal. Wink wink. Nobody will own white slaves. (At least decent white people won’t be enslaved.) And then we don’t’ actually have to give any ground on keeping black people down. Win win. Not that I suspect you mean it that way, but it’s really a slick little side-step around the greatest civil rights issue of our time. Rather than change everything around to make it “fair” that gays don’t get governmental marriage benefits we just need to step up and give them the same thing everyone else has. The end.
It may be “bold” in the sense that nobody agrees with it–or even takes it seriously. But it’s not bold in the sense of standing up for minority rights in the face of a lot of majority opposition.