[Winona Online Democracy]
I understand that Paul is both personally and professionally interested in
health care funding, in general, and alternative health care funding, in
particular. But that is not what the gay marriage debate is
about...sorry...no. I mean no offense to Paul, but we were talking about
human rights, not health care costs...the latter is irrelevant to our
discussion of the former.
I could give a rip what gay marriage would cost business or insurers...but
I'm thinking that we're not talking about a ton of money. If you will
recall the brief period during which domestic partner benefits were a part
of state of Minnesota union contracts, the cost was quite small. Those who
opposed the benefits admitted they didn't do it for the money...they did not
want to legitimize homosexuality.
This may be an armchair discussion for some folks, but for others it is a
far different thing. If you read the press release from LCR in Eva's recent
post, you will recall they labeled this effort "a declaration of war on gay
and lesbian families." Log cabin republicans have been apologists for the
bigots in their party for two decades...but even they can't stomach this
one.
The Federal Marriage Amendment for many, I think, represents an opportunity
for conservatives to fight back against Janet Jackson, et al...and that is
where this thread started if you've been following it since day one. But
consider this before you come to the conclusion that the amendment's passage
would slow our spiral down into the sewer.
FMA would be the first time that the constitution has been amended to create
second class citizens. African-Americans were, I think, a sixth of a white
man or something like that back in 1789...but we've told ourselves as a
society we've gotten past that kind of thinking.
Some people are uncomfortable with homosexuality ('do you know what those
people do?')...fine, whatever...but don't mess with the constitution just
because you don't like "those people." Most obnoxious people on TV and
Radio are straight, most gays and lesbians are pretty boring. While many
gay men like to party and such (like many straight men), did you also
realize that (as a demographic group, and on a per capita basis) gay male
couples are the most likely of all groups (straight, lesbian, gay) to have a
full time parent stay at home with the kids? We shouldn't generalize.
It's a tired old argument, but here I go again...
Special education costs too damn much money and those kids are gonna end up
working at McDonalds anyway...we don't need to educate 'em...let's AMEND THE
CONSTITUTION!
I've never cared much for Chinamen...they eat dogs...get 'em the hell out of
here...let's AMEND THE CONSTITUTION!
Fat people are ugly and cost us health care dollars. Anyone more than 50
pounds overweight should be sent to a special jail where they must stay
until they are normal...let's AMEND THE CONSTITUTION!
Where does it end? Who is safe tomorrow if gays and lesbians aren't safe
today in the protection of our sacred constitution?
Acceptance of gays and lesbians is growing...but people fear the new and
different. I think in ten years this argument will be a relic and we will
be a more inclusive society. Right now certain political elements are
capitalizing on fear. Names are being taken. Remember Vichy France? They
had less than ten years, their come-uppance lasted much longer.
I'm proud to be an American...where at least I know I'm free. I'm gonna
look out for my neighbors, too, lest they come for me next. What are you
all going to do?
Bob Sebo
Winona
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
