You are currently browsing the tag archive for the ‘hate’ tag.
Fred Phelps is an ass. A hateful, vile, waste of space. There, that’s as angry as I’ll be getting…hopefully. Fred Phelps and his Westboro Baptist Church lunatics (mostly relatives of his) are planning on coming to San Diego within the week to spew forth their despicable ramblings, and thankfully San Diego folks are not going to let it take place without responding. Mind you, PEACEFUL responses, without engaging these imbeciles who have the audacity to even protest at funerals of military men and women. (Yes, I will be practicing restraint. Practice, practice, practice…) Read the rest of this entry »
This election is something I obviously felt quite strongly about, not only on the presidential level, but especially with some California propositions I took to heart; Prop 2, Prop 4, Prop 8. One would think that with my choice for President, Barack Obama, being swept into office, and two of the propositions I felt strongly about all going the way I had hoped, I would be running to my blog, sharing my happiness and thanking everyone who voted the same way I did. But the joy at seeing my beloved country make the historic choice it did for President, was unfortunately overwhelmingly deflated when I realized that the majority of my fellow Californians who took the time to vote on Proposition 8 (defining marriage as only between a man and a woman, thereby stripping away the civil rights of the GLBT community to marry the person they love) voted to support this antiquated, hateful, and discriminatory proposition.
This has affected me in a profound and extended way which admittedly has surprised me. I’m not gay. I’m not married, and don’t have any mad desire to be (have already traveled down that road). But why should I have rights my friends and neighbors don’t have just because I was born straight? Why should my love for someone else be deemed “appropriate” and “legal” just because as a female I may want to wed a man and not a woman? I don’t get it folks, I really, really don’t. I don’t get how someone thinks that they have the right, usually based on their religious beliefs, to legislate who someone else can spend their life with, who they can love and be with. I don’t get the hate–and yes it’s hate so don’t try to sugarcoat it–that people have for others who believe in something different from what they might believe in.
And where is this unbelievable hell that we are all supposed to descend into if gay people are allowed to marry? They’ve had the legal right in California for several months now, and I’m not seeing the heterosexual marriages needing protection from that. I’m not seeing the marriages of straight folks falling apart any faster than they already were. And have your children come home from school over the past months, suddenly preaching “the gay lifestyle” because they are being indoctrinated into it at their public school? Hmmm, the sky has not been falling Chicken Little? Say it ain’t so!
How ridiculous all of this is. Ridiculous that this proposition even made it to the ballot, especially considering our State courts have already stated that disallowing gay marriage is unconstitutional. This is definitely going back into the courts which is only going to extend the divisiveness, the hate, and the pain being inflicted upon members of the GLBT community who have to face each day knowing that other human beings are considering them to be second class citizens without the right to love the person they choose and have that love be acknowledged legally in marriage.
Do any of you that voted yes on Prop 8 REALLY think that you will be keeping gay marriages from being legal for all time? Really? Do you really feel so strongly about the issue that you are willing to spend your time fighting against equality for all? Is there nothing you could be spending your time on more productively? Really? How sad it is that you choose to spend even a second of your life fighting against love. I feel for you. I really do. What a sad little life you have if needing to strip away the rights of others is a priority for you. Sad and pitiful. Shame on you, narrow-minded, hateful person, shame on you.
Finally tonight as promised, a Special Comment on the passage, last week, of Proposition Eight in California, which rescinded the right of same-sex couples to marry, and tilted the balance on this issue, from coast to coast.
Some parameters, as preface. This isn’t about yelling, and this isn’t about politics, and this isn’t really just about Prop-8. And I don’t have a personal investment in this: I’m not gay, I had to strain to think of one member of even my very extended family who is, I have no personal stories of close friends or colleagues fighting the prejudice that still pervades their lives.
And yet to me this vote is horrible. Horrible. Because this isn’t about yelling, and this isn’t about politics. This is about the human heart, and if that sounds corny, so be it.
If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don’t want to deny you yours. They don’t want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.
Only now you are saying to them—no. You can’t have it on these terms. Maybe something similar. If they behave. If they don’t cause too much trouble. You’ll even give them all the same legal rights—even as you’re taking away the legal right, which they already had. A world around them, still anchored in love and marriage, and you are saying, no, you can’t marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn’t marry?
I keep hearing this term “re-defining” marriage. If this country hadn’t re-defined marriage, black people still couldn’t marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on the books which made that illegal in 1967. 1967.
The parents of the President-Elect of the United States couldn’t have married in nearly one third of the states of the country their son grew up to lead. But it’s worse than that. If this country had not “re-defined” marriage, some black people still couldn’t marry black people. It is one of the most overlooked and cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if the people were slaves. Since slaves were property, they could not legally be husband and wife, or mother and child. Their marriage vows were different: not “Until Death, Do You Part,” but “Until Death or Distance, Do You Part.” Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.
You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if the people are gay.
And uncountable in our history are the number of men and women, forced by society into marrying the opposite sex, in sham marriages, or marriages of convenience, or just marriages of not knowing, centuries of men and women who have lived their lives in shame and unhappiness, and who have, through a lie to themselves or others, broken countless other lives, of spouses and children, all because we said a man couldn’t marry another man, or a woman couldn’t marry another woman. The sanctity of marriage.
How many marriages like that have there been and how on earth do they increase the “sanctity” of marriage rather than render the term, meaningless?
What is this, to you? Nobody is asking you to embrace their expression of love. But don’t you, as human beings, have to embrace… that love? The world is barren enough.
It is stacked against love, and against hope, and against those very few and precious emotions that enable us to go forward. Your marriage only stands a 50-50 chance of lasting, no matter how much you feel and how hard you work.
And here are people overjoyed at the prospect of just that chance, and that work, just for the hope of having that feeling. With so much hate in the world, with so much meaningless division, and people pitted against people for no good reason, this is what your religion tells you to do? With your experience of life and this world and all its sadnesses, this is what your conscience tells you to do?
With your knowledge that life, with endless vigor, seems to tilt the playing field on which we all live, in favor of unhappiness and hate… this is what your heart tells you to do? You want to sanctify marriage? You want to honor your God and the universal love you believe he represents? Then Spread happiness—this tiny, symbolic, semantical grain of happiness—share it with all those who seek it. Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice telling you to stand against this. And then tell me how you can believe both that statement and another statement, another one which reads only “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
You are asked now, by your country, and perhaps by your creator, to stand on one side or another. You are asked now to stand, not on a question of politics, not on a question of religion, not on a question of gay or straight. You are asked now to stand, on a question of love. All you need do is stand, and let the tiny ember of love meet its own fate.
You don’t have to help it, you don’t have it applaud it, you don’t have to fight for it. Just don’t put it out. Just don’t extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don’t know and you don’t understand and maybe you don’t even want to know. It is, in fact, the ember of your love, for your fellow person just because this is the only world we have. And the other guy counts, too.
This is the second time in ten days I find myself concluding by turning to, of all things, the closing plea for mercy by Clarence Darrow in a murder trial.
But what he said, fits what is really at the heart of this:
“I was reading last night of the aspiration of the old Persian poet, Omar-Khayyam,” he told the judge. It appealed to me as the highest that I can vision. I wish it was in my heart, and I wish it was in the hearts of all: So I be written in the Book of Love; I do not care about that Book above. Erase my name, or write it as you will, So I be written in the Book of Love.”
So the Yes on Prop 8 folks are at it again–lying, and distorting the truth to meet their low standards! Guess that’s what a campaign resorts to when they know their issue is flawed, discriminatory, and based on nothing but hate. This time they targeted African-Americans attempting to have them believe that Barack Obama supports California’s Proposition 8, which he and Joe Biden most definitely do not. I’ll include the NO on Prop 8 press release with the portion of the statement from the Obama/Biden campaign in blue. Magic Johnson also says NO on Prop 8 and has recorded a phone message for California voters. I’ll post the text of the message at the end of this blog. But first, here’s the newest video from the NO on Prop 8 campaign titled “Divisive”, with words from Barack Obama, Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the California Teachers Union, leading California newspapers, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. (Thankfully he’s right on this issue, but SOOOO wrong on backing McSame/Failin’…sigh.)
No on 8 Reveals New Ad Showing Obama, Schwarzenegger, Feinstein Joining Together Calling for Defeat of Unfair Initiative
Ad Answers Proposition 8’s Dishonest Flyer Targeting African-American Voters
SACRAMENTO – Hours after the Proposition 8 campaign admitted it had mailed a flyer to African-American voters that lies about Sen. Barack Obama’s position on the initiative, the NO on 8 Campaign launched a statewide television ad reminding voters that Sen. Obama, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and Sen. Dianne Feinstein, as well as the state’s leading newspapers, have all called for the defeat of Proposition 8.
Using the words each of these leaders has used to describe the unfair initiative, the new ad makes clear that Sen. Obama has called Prop 8 “divisive and discriminatory,” that Gov. Schwarzenegger has said “it should never happen,” and Sen. Feinstein closes by telling voters: “No matter how you feel about marriage, vote against discrimination, and Vote NO on 8.”
No on Prop 8 Campaign Slams Dishonest Mailer Targeting African-American Voters
Mailer Misrepresents Sen. Obama Who is Opposed to Proposition 8; Misleading African-American Voters is Clearly the Goal of Deceptive Prop 8 Campaign
SACRAMENTO – The NO on Prop 8 campaign today condemned an official Proposition 8 mailer clearly targeted to African-American voters that completely misrepresents and lies about Sen. Barack Obama’s position on Proposition 8. In fact, the Obama campaign felt compelled to release a new statement tonight making it absolutely clear that he and Joe Biden oppose Prop 8 in the strongest terms.
The mailer, from the Proposition 8 campaign, twists Sen. Obama’s comments about marriage to suggest support for the unfair initiative — when just the opposite is true. In a June 29 letter to the Alice B. Toklas Democratic Club, Sen. Obama wrote that he opposes the “divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution.”
The mailer drew a strong reaction from San Francisco District Attorney Kamala Harris.
“It is despicable that the Yes on 8 campaign would send out a last minute mailer to the African American community in a clear attempt to mislead voters about Senator Barack Obama’s position on Proposition 8,” said District Attorney Harris. “The leadership of this campaign should issue an immediate retraction and apology for this transparent attempt to deceive the public.”
The Obama letter reads in part:
“As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law…And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states. For too long, issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It’s time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.”
Tonight, in response to the mailer, the Obama campaign released the following statement:
“Senators Obama and Biden have made clear their commitment to fighting for equal rights for all Americans whether it’s by granting LGBT Americans all the civil rights and benefits available to heterosexual couples, or repealing ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” said a statement issued by campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt. “Senator Obama has already announced that the Obama-Biden ticket opposes Proposition 8 and similar discriminatory constitutional amendments that could roll back the civil rights he and Senator Biden strongly believe should be afforded to all Americans.”
SACRAMENTO – Magic Johnson, enshrined in the Basketball Hall of Fame after winning five NBA championships as a Los Angeles Laker, and three Most Valuable Player awards, has lent his voice to the chorus of those calling Proposition 8 wrong and unfair.
In a recorded telephone call to California voters, Johnson says:
“This is Magic Johnson calling to ask you to join me and Barack Obama in opposing Proposition 8.
“Prop 8 singles out one group of Californians to be treated differently – including members of our family, our friends, and our coworkers.
“That is not what California is about. So this Tuesday, vote no on Proposition 8. It is unfair and wrong. Thanks.”
The telephone message from Magic Johnson will reach millions of California voters in the final days, urging voters to reject this discriminatory and unfair initiative.
For more information on NO on Prop 8 please visit www.noonprop8.com.
The NO on Prop 8 Campaign has put together some great informational television ads, and has the endorsement of logical and forward-thinking groups, businesses, and individuals from all walks of life, but is now in DIRE NEED OF MONEY in order to push back against the massive influx of finances from those who are supporting discrimination: the backers of Prop 8, led in large numbers by Mormons. Please donate as much as you can afford (and as quickly as you can) to help make a bold and powerful statement on November 4th that California will NOT go back in time and tolerate discrimination of ANY of her citizens. Thank you! (ADDED: Shout-out to my friend Jeanne who read this blog, then donated to the NO on Prop 8 campaign–and she doesn’t even live in California! WTG, my friend, wtg! :))
New No on Prop 8 Ad Calls Upon Californians to Reject Discrimination
Ad is Narrated by Samuel Jackson
SACRAMENTO – The NO on Prop 8 campaign today announced a dramatic new television ad, narrated by actor Samuel L. Jackson. The ad calls upon Californians to reject discrimination, and Vote NO on Prop 8.
The full text of the ad follows:
“It wasn’t that long ago that discrimination was legal in California.
“Japanese Americans were confined in internment camps.
“Armenians couldn’t buy a house in the Central Valley.
“Latinos and African Americans were told who they could and could not marry.
“It was a sorry time in our history.
“Today the sponsors of Prop 8 want to eliminate fundamental rights.
“We have an obligation to pass along to our children a more tolerant, more decent society.
“Vote No on Prop 8 it’s unfair and it’s wrong.”
The ad places Prop 8 in its appropriate historical context as a measure that would discriminate against certain Californians and treat people differently under the law.
“We believe it is important in the final days of an unfair initiative attacking individual rights, to remind voters that there have been other times in our history when we stood at this threshold of fairness,” said Patrick Guerriero, NO on 8 Campaign Director. “We know that most California voters do not want to wake up Wednesday morning to learn that we’ve taken a step back to a darker time. That’s why we believe on Tuesday, voters will resoundingly reject Prop 8.”
“Proposition 8 would take away fundamental individual rights, and I believe the historical analogies presented by the NO on Prop 8 campaign are completely appropriate,” said Congressman Mike Honda (D-Campbell). “I am opposed to Prop 8, and I hope my fellow Californians will reject it.”
“California used to ban people of different races from getting married under the law. It was wrong then and it’s wrong now,” said Fabian Nuñez, Former Speaker of the California Assembly. “Proposition 8 is a lot like that unfair ban on interracial marriage. And even though people may feel differently about marriage, everyone ought to agree unequal treatment under the law is a bad thing.”
“Proposition 8 eliminates equal rights for one segment of the population while continuing to grant that right to others,” said Maria Armoudian, an Armenian-American radio personality on KPFK in Los Angeles. “We Armenians have had to endure a century of discrimination. Let us now stand together calling for an end to discrimination for all people. Vote NO on Prop 8.”
Using historical footage, the ad reminds voters of three particularly bleak periods in state history:
— Japanese American Internment: Authorized by President Roosevelt in 1942, the Army ordered all people of Japanese descent, whether citizens or non-citizens, living in CA to be interned in permanent “relocation centers.” Those centers remained operational until the end of the war. Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Earl Warren, who was California Attorney General at that time, later wrote that the internment was “not in keeping with our American concepts of freedoms and rights of citizens.”
— California’s Ban on Interracial Marriage: In 1948, California became the first state in the nation to wipe away a state law banning interracial marriages. In the 1967 case of Loving vs. Virginia dealing with the remaining state bans, the United State Supreme Court ruled that: [T]he freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men. Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival.”
— Racially Restrictive Covenants: These covenants were widely enforced in the early 20th century to discriminate against African Americans, Jews and other ethnic groups by prohibiting the lease or sale of property. The covenants were widely used in the Central Valley against Armenians. They were declared unconstitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in 1948.
In 2007, on the 40th anniversary of the Loving vs. Virginia decision, Mildred Loving wrote: “I am still not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness, and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving and loving, are all about.”