So, I'm watching Top Chef, as I usually do on Wednesday nights, and the elimination challenge was to cook for a bachelor and bachelorette party. Well, it seems as if one of the cheftestants, a lesbian named Ashley, was angry that she had to cook for a straight couple about to be married when she, herself, cannot marry the women she loves.
This annoyed me. I mean, is that any different that, say, a straight chef angry that he has to cook for a gay couple? We wouldnt stand for that! We'd be outraged! We'd take our aprons off, slap them on the counter and storm out in a huff, by nelly. So, it pissed me off that Ashley bitched and moaned.
Plus, let's not forget she's in the hospitality industry. She is there to cook, not to judge; to saute, not to politicize; to bake, not to....okay, I'm done with that.
But then Tom Colicchio decided to blog about the issue of same sex marriage on his blog. Says Tom: "I’m going to go out on a limb and say a few words about same-sex marriage: First of all, part of the problem with the issue is that it is framed by opponents as a discussion of whether gay people should get special rights. This is specious – yes, special legislation or court decisions grant them the right to wed in a particular state, however this is done to ensure that they share equal protection under the law by finally being able to avail themselves of the same rights as everyone else. They are not seeking special treatment, just equitable treatment. Second, religion has no business being part of the discussion. When a couple is wed in a house of worship, the officiant may be performing a religious rite, but as far as the law is concerned, that officiant has been authorized to perform a civil function, plain and simple. And even were same-sex marriage to be legalized by the state, no one would be holding a gun to the heads of the clergy to require them to perform a ceremony that their faith or personal creed does not condone. Just as some rabbis would not perform my marriage to my wife because I wasn’t Jewish, clergy can decline performing same-sex marriages; gay couples can either find clergy willing to officiate or can be wed in a civil setting. The idea that religious leaders are continuing to shape state law is just wrong. The institution of marriage should be available to all. The idea that you can have a life-long partner and not make decisions for them in a hospital, not share in insurance benefits, not automatically have parental rights unless you are the birth parent, is just flat-out wrong."
You go, Tom!