The Fucci Files

Gay Rights are Human Rights

Posted by Trent on November 11, 2008

I have never been more proud of political commentator Keith Olbermann then I was last night when he devoted his “special comment” to the embarrassing and disturbing passage of Proposition 8 (legislation overturning Civil Unions to gay and lesbian couples in California in the latest election.)

Olbermann actually personified my position and feelings on the issue quite accurately. He began by situating himself as a straight man with no close gay relatives but with friends and colleagues prohibited from enjoying the same freedoms he does because of their sexual orientation. This is exactly how I feel; I am not a gay man, nor do I have any gay relatives, that I am aware of, but I do have many gay friends that I would like to believe are just as American, and indeed, just as deserving of all the rights and responsibilities provided by those unalienable rights in our Declaration of Independence.

I also like how Olbermann used the analogy of other minorities getting married as a point of contention because that is one of the first defenses I use when I discuss gay rights as well. Basically, if we as a country think that African Americans should marry “white” people or marry each other (something once illegal in this country) then so should we defend the right for gay unions; if those with a mental or physical handicap can enjoy governmental sanctioned marriageĀ then so should a lesbian couple [I am in no way suggesting that homosexuality is a handicap.] Or, since it is Veteran’s Day, what if there was a law saying all those that served in our nation’s armed forces could not marry? In my opinion, this is the exact same issue. It is the controlling body of the country personifying their fear of a group of people they are afraid of or don’t understand.

Actually, I do not even think we have the right to put it on the ballot. This is not an issue that you can poll the general public about. It does not matter what the majority opinion is, the Bill of Rights was actually created to protect the minority. We would need no First Amendment if everyone spoke the majority opinion all the time, for example. Again, I would argue the majory of the South in the late 19th early 20th century would be opposed to African American unions but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be protected by our country. All that voted for Proposition 8, Amendment 2 in Florida, and the countless other public measures designed to inhibit freedoms to Americans should literally feel ashamed of yourselves. What gives you the right to think you have the power to legislate humanity? That does not sound like the “small government” conservatives hold so near and dear…

The following is a clip of Olbermann’s “Special Comment.” He more clearly and effectively conveys my ideas, giving more attention to the idea of love (or lack there of in the world) and the need to allow the ember of love to burn. Please take a look at this video. We must remember they have done nothing to us and their lives do not affect us in negative ways. We cannot legislate sexuality, we cannot legislate freedom, we cannot legislate love.

3 Responses to “Gay Rights are Human Rights”

  1. lilyseye said

    Love the clip. And I think your grammar was quite good here despite a run-on sentence or two ;)

  2. JMcD said

    I look at it this way: my parents adamantly claim that they fell in love at first sight. They married only 3 months later and have been extremely happy ever since, which has been more than 26 years. If I walk out of the library today and see a man and just know that he is the love of my life and I want to spend the rest of my life with him, I want to be able to do what my parents did.

    I think you are hitting a key issue in bringing up the South, touching on our lived experience in a way that can be extended to all of Middle/Rural America. I have joined several groups on Facebook against Prop 8, one of which argued that if we wanted to protect the sanctity of marriage we should also make divorce illegal. I realized then that for many small, rural towns a divorce is scandal. And without trying to overgeneralize the rural religious attitude, divorce has many religious implications. I disagree with but respect conservative social views, especially when it comes to religion, and am actually torn on whether or not marriage is the correct avenue for non-heterosexual unions. That would have to be decided in seminaries and sanctuaries. It is very important that these socially conservative communities show enough compassion for homosexuals to recognize that enduring relationships are not exclusively a feature of heterosexual couples. No one has the right to deny the legal benefits that are afforded to such unions either.

  3. Trent said

    I think you’re on to something by citing some people would like to outlaw divorce. Since I think the majority of Americans would be opposed to that–remembering 51% of all marriages end that way. I heard one Progressive suggest a full separation of church and state by removing the term “marriage” from governmental affairs altogether. This way all couples, regardless of sexual orientation, would have a civil union. Leave it up to churches and communities to decide who engages (no pun intended) in the religious ceremony of “marriage” while ensuring all couples have the RIGHT to civil unions.

    Those opposed to “Gay Marriage” cite religious issues right? That’s not good enough in a country founded on the separation of those two…

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>