Filed under: Rights, Same-sex marriage | Tagged: North Carolina, Stephen Colbert |
Author
Recent Comments
The Sauciest Duck on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Michael on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Stephen Moreton on Chauvin and Rittenhouse Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Merry Christmas Mele Kalikimaka | Fo… on Mele Kalikimaka somdeblahiriyahoocoi… on Thought of the day Michael on Wuhan virus and one last… Quick correction | F… on The A-Unicornist, Bernie Bro… The A-Unicornist, Be… on When I know I’ve beat… Somdeb Lahiri on Thought of the day
For the Sake of Science 
I imagine there are no great numbers of tears Mr. Colbert, and likewise Mr. Hawkins.
If anything, rather than tears political galvanization is the result. As far as I am aware, no battle has ever been won by tears. Political or martial.
I know plenty of people who cried in 2009 when a majority of Mainers decided that their sexual orientation was superior to that of gays.
What a waste of energy and time.
Remember that problem that crying solved?
Neither do I.
In other news, I’m not aware of any evidence that tears are a bad thing, I understand tears to be restorative to an extent.
People who use their religious bigotry to trample on the rights of others think they know the mind of God. If there is a God I hope he/she shows them the error of their ways when their time of judgement comes. Meanwhile all freedom loving people should do everything possible to protect the rights of gays and lesbians. Remember history. First it was the murder of the handicapped, retarded and homosexuals. Then it was the murder of political opponents. Then it was the extermination of the Jews.
I belong to a past generation Micheal doesn’t like to hear speak up as our voice appears irrelevant to today’s issue…hence I don’t visit these pages as much as I used to. But here I am again…marveling about the opportunities such a widely diverse culture such as ours offers.
In my day homosexuality was a sin, illegal, and a sickness. The very idea a gay person’s “civil right” to be gay was not even a concept on the political horizon..it was cast in the in the Wilde-an undergrowth as “The love which dare not speak it’s name”…and there it languished for decades. I daresay I subscribed to all these beliefs.
I have seen it emerge from the undergrowth over these many years. Popular movies at the time such as “Tea and sympathy” started to break ground along with plays like ” Suddenly Last Summer” . But seeing it referenced on stage or film as an aberration was one thing but hearing it on the news being politicized as a right was quite another….like The Stonewall riots. , I was content with the notion “to each his own” but questioned” why for heaven’s sake don’t they keep it for themselves”.
When the the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from it’s list of illnesses in the 70’s the flood gates opened. As a student of Sociology at the time my previous attitudes had to be questioned.
Science has yet to answer whether it’s nature or nurture which causes one sex to be attracted to the same sex and I am not a student of the Gay Movement and cannot trace it’s evolution to today’s growing consensus any more than I already have. But I have answered my question. They don’t keep it to themselves because we are all human and need and want to express this humaneness in a way which doesn’t damage or hurt others. And we live in a wonderfully diverse culture with a secular constitution which gives us all the civil right to be ourselves.