Copyright © 2007 ◊
All Rights Reserved
You know, it is just like the whole Ďsame sexí marriage
debacle that is being waged in the
I mean if something is black, we call it that, we donít
label it as oh that Ďdark colorí or some other bullshit. We say the Ďblack thingí but when it comes to homosexuals,
well seems we are in a whole different world.
Marriage is simply the union of two people, granted special
rights under civil law. There are various religious definitions, but we arenít asking for any Church to give
us visitation rights to hospitals to see our partner. We arenít asking any Church to reach into its coffers
to give us survivor benefits, or to grant us health insurance benefits either. So what is there problem with
us being Married?
When you discriminate against a person of color, or whose
religion is different, the world calls it ĎRacismí, but if it is a person who is a homosexual, it is called
ĎHomophobiaí. It is even made to sound like some irrational fear no different than those afraid of heights,
or tight spaces. Hating Homosexuals is not an irrational fear, it is Racism.
Main Entry: ho∑mo∑pho∑bia
: irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals (Cite This Source)
Now I donít know, but discrimination is not some irrational
fear like being afraid of heights is. Yes I would concede that fear plays a role in all this, and I would also
concede that racism, is an irrational act, to some degree. However I would also argue that whether you fear
Homosexuals, or otherís who are different than you, to hate them is more about being able to blame someone else
for your own short comings.
I donít buy the fear argument. I mean okay I fear spiders,
does that give me the right to hate them? To perhaps launch a campaign to rid the planet of them? I donít think
so, and besides we are talking about people.
For the sake of this discussion, assume I have this unreasonable
fear of people who have blonde hair and an earring in their nose. Should that give me the right to deny them
a job? Should that fear, be passed over as just being irrational, even though I preach how evil these people
are, and convince many others of that?
Say my Priest or Rabbi finds one or two passages in our
Bible, that says people who have earrings in their nose, and are blonde were sent by Satan to corrupt the world.
Should that then mean that my Government disavow those people, deny them from serving in the military, deny
them pension benefits, or health benefits?
If it did, you can bet your sweet ass that theyíd be
hollering Ďracismí and if people went out of their way to persecute blondes with earrings in their nose, they
get added onto the Hate Crime Laws lickity split.
So why not Gays?
Because we have sanitized the stigma, instead of calling
it racism, we call it homophobia. We give a nice medical sounding name, making it sound like simply like a medical
illness, cured by going to your doctor. Unfortunately the oneís like Mathew Shepard might disagree with that.
Homophobia is Racism.
Part of the problem is that being Gay isnít a visible
minority like having a different skin color is. That also adds to the fear, I suppose, but I think this all
goes a lot deeper than that. I honestly think it goes to a deep seated shame for sex. Why I donít know, because
sex is supposed to not just be natural, but spiritual as well. I mean I know when I have sex with the David,
it sure as hell beats any sex I have had in the past with nameless dates.
Sure it was good then, but what David and I share, goes
far beyond the physical release. It is spiritual, it is a union between us that is heightened by the sexual
nature of that union. Somehow that alone makes people nervous, because maybe it doesnít happen for them?
Racism is as old as the world is, which doesnít make
it right. However, we have become very sophisticated in how we couch things these days. We are becoming experts
in hiding the true meanings, in order to avoid the discomfort of dealing with the truth. I think most in
I also honestly believe people are looking for scapegoats.
In the past it was Jews, and now that they have managed to defend themselves against such attacks, the cowards
need a new scapegoat. Oh they have tried other minorities, but when they wised up, and fought back, these cowards
moved on. So now it is our turn, and okay, it is all part of life. But you know, those who were once the victims,
are joining in on this too, which amazes me.
You would think, once you have experienced this kind
of shit, that you would be more inclined to not do it yourself, and yet in this case not so. I mean look at
the candidates running for President. Has any single one come out in favor of Same Sex MARRIAGE?
They all claim to have no issue with calling it something else, but isnít that just a cop out? Isnít that just
them tossing a bone to the GLBT community, hoping for their support?
Back a few years ago, someone told me that they called
people who didnít like Homosexuals, Homophobic, because while they didnít like us, it wasnít really personal,
or violent. I shook my head then, and still shake it now. Not Violent? I donít know, but there are suicide lines
expanding because of the abuse being heaped on teens. A recent study even shows that 40% of Gay Men have encountered
some form of abuse, some form of physical attack either against their person, or against their property.
me it isnít violent.
What I do not get, is why is society so determined to
sanitize things? I mean murder is murder, why call it something else, to make it more acceptable? Why should
murder be acceptable?
We call those who strap bombs around their bodies, and
go blow up night clubs, or cafes, Suicide Bombers, when in reality they are Murdering Innocent people. Yes,
they kill themselves, but odds are it is never just themselves. They murder others, more than just one, so logically
it would seem more accurate to label them Murder Bombers. Yet we donít, and I wonder if that is to make it easier
Bush commutes Libby so he doesnít go to jail, and while
the guy is still paying a fine, for everyone else, that is a pardon. The guy walks away from jail time, but
its okay, as it was commuted.
Gays are attacked, beaten, ridiculed, and Bush doesnít
believe they need protection under the Hate Crime Laws, because attacking Gays is no different than attacking
Seniors, or indigent, according to Bush and others. Like give me a break.
Seniors who are attacked, are generally for robbery.
They are considered easier targets. It isnít because they are old. When a Senior is attacked, the motif is money,
financial gain, not because of their age. When Gays are attacked, it is because they are Gay, not for robbery,
not out of passion, or any thing else that makes a crime, ordinary. And there we go again, diminishing the effect.
By downplaying the cause of the crime, by saying it isnít
on the same level as an attack against a Black Man because of skin color, or on a Muslim because of his religion,
we diminish the effect on peopleís minds. They donít look at it as being serious, so when the President threatens
to VETO adding sexual orientation for protection under Hate Crime Legislation, they donít understand the fuss.
Just as they donít understand the fuss when we get fired for being gay, conditioned into believing that it is
a bosses right to fire or not hire people they find objectionable.
They simply donít equate it with racism, and why? Simple,
because it has all been sanitized, labeled as being Homophobia, instead of calling it what it isÖ