If you get a chance to spend a few minutes here, watch this amazing commentary by Keith Olbermann on California's Proposition 8, which was rejected by a vote of about 52% AGAINST an amendment to allow same-sex couples the legal right to marry in our great State.
Ellen Degeneres has been talking about Keith's incredible opinion on the matter during her show, and one of my fellow bloggers just added it in a recent entry so I took a gander. I was mesmerized at his passion, clarity and common-sense and I couldn't agree more. So, I decided to post it here as well.
I'm not gay and wouldn't have the slightest interest in a romantic/sexual relationship with someone of my gender. But, I have some gay friends, gay family members and know lots of former co-workers who are gay too. (One of my biggest crushes EVER was on a man that I worked with that eventually came out of the closet as a gay man! I was crushed.) I have friends who have gay children and gay siblings. It doesn't diminish them a bit in my eyes. They color my world..so to speak..with all the colors of the rainbow! :) In fact, as my late Grandmother used to say...."Isn't it wonderful that we aren't all alike, because it would be one b-o-r-i-n-g world if we were."
So it just flat out amazes me that people would be that damn caught up in preventing two people who love each other, who just happen to be of the same sex from getting married, when as Keith said...we heterosexuals haven't been all that successful in the marriage department, with 50/50 odds of divorce.
The older I get, the more I realize that LOVE is all that really matters in this life. We all want to love and be loved in return!
I am nearly 55 years old and I'm wanting to experience a new loving relationship and eventually marry that special guy so we can share the rest of our lives...and damn it, if these men don't work out...I may have to look for someone fun-loving and incredibly special to marry like......Ellen Degeneres!
Really, who would want to deny me that option? ;)
Posts
I'll jump in here and get everyone pissed-off enough that you're guaranteed a full board of comments.
ReplyDeleteLove whomever you want. Stick whatever you have in whatever orifice your significant other will let you get away with. Have fun. Be happy.
Just don't call it marriage. That's the difference. Nothing in the laws or propositions "outlaws" gay relationship in any shape or form.
You just can't call it a marriage.
The amount of violence and hate crimes taking place in the name of "tolerance & diversity" is no different than burning a cross in someone's yard.
Dear Remo--
ReplyDelete"Marriage" can be anything that two consenting adults and someone to say the words over it agree it should be. It is not and never should have been a state or civil matter.
Unfortunately, in our society, being "married" guarantees some couples certain civil rights that "un-married" couples don't get; and those who are allowed to marry see fit to declare that others should not be allowed that privilege and those civil rights.
It is an injustice, and it should not be tolerated in our society any more than racism or sexism.
How would you like it if some segment of society decided that people of your ilk (white? Arizonan? Red-neck?) should not be allowed to be police officers? And then got enough signatures on a petition to put it to a vote, and then got enough votes to make it law? Would that make it okay? Would you be willing to abide by the will of the majority?
I'm thinkin' not...
Remo--
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry you object to the term "red-neck." I actually didn't mean it as an insult...I was just searching for a term that identified people with a certain political viewpoint. Hey, I live out here in the country...some of my best friends are red-necks. I don't let that bother me.
So now all gays and lesbians are terrorists? That seems to be the new label for any group that the right wing has decided it doesn't like. I won't argue there are zealots out there who resort to violence to get their point across--just as there are in any political struggle where negative emotion and frustration cause people to make bad choices. Like "right-to-lifers" who murder doctors and bomb clinics...
I'm interested in finding out what reasoning--completely innocent of homobphobia or religious overtones--would cause one to be logically and sensibly anti-gay marriage...
When the state sees fit to confer certain rights upon couples who have been joined together in what began as a religious ritual, it has changed the rules by virtue of its very involvement. It may not grant or withhold these rights from certain members of society based on the condemnation of a relationship by any given religious tradition. To do so is a violation of the separation of church and state.
Government needs to get out of the "marriage" business. If the state is going to offer special rights to legally joined couples, the legal mechanism must be available to any couple wishing to avail themselves of those rights.
I'm like you--a straight for gay marriage. It's amusing to see Remo and Lisa, two old friends from AOL days, fighting it out on your comment page.
ReplyDeleteAww; that is the sweetest I have ever seen Keith being! Now I have a little crush on him. Again.
ReplyDeleteYou're right; I think Olbermann says it best ~ why would you deny anyone the chance to be 'a little less alone in the world' in the same socially sanctioned manner that the rest of us so enjoy? As Keith rightly points out, marriage has been redefined in the past; let's do so again, this time in the service of love and humanity. As proud of I generally am of this great state, I was saddened and yes, shamed by this vote.
Well, by this vote and, you know, the whole Gov. Schwarzenegger thing.
um...as proud as I generally am...
ReplyDeleteAs careful editor am I generally of..:)
A- freakin'- MEN! Great post.
ReplyDeleteNancy
Yeah, Paul... It's just like old times, isn't it? Kinda brings a tear to yer eye... ;)
ReplyDeleteI like your way of thinking. I don't get the fervor over declaring marriage to be only between a man and a woman. I always thought that marriage was between two people who love each other. WHere is the rule book that specifies that the two people have to be male and female? As for remo's suggestion that gay people can have a substitute as long as they don't call it marriage, that is bigotry. No matter how much you tell yourself differently, when you think that the majority has a right to tell a subset of the population that they may not have the full benefits of the society that are enjoyed by the majority, that's bigotry.
ReplyDeleteHe never ceases to surprise me with his compassion and tolerance. Thanks for the video, Jeff
ReplyDelete