What with marriage equality trials going on in California, and conservative wingnuts in New Hampshire all up in arms, the debate over simple equality--a debate which should never be allowed to happen....equality should be a given--goes on.
And now it's raging in Indiana.
At the Indiana Statehouse, Senator Carlin Yoder, a Republican, of course, introduced a measure that would allow Indiana voters to decide if the state's constitution should specifically bar marriages and civil unions between gay and lesbian couples. Yoder says, "I firmly believe in the sacred definition of marriage as Indiana has always known it, as it is written in statute."
Yoder? Listen up. Don't make me go all Real Housewives of New Jersey on your ass: marriage has constantly changed in the last five thousand years. Do a little research and see; hell, it changed in the last forty years when interracial marriages were legalized and recognized.
And it's time for another change.
But, Yoder, with his asshat firmly in place, says, "This is not in any way an attack on the gay and lesbian community. By doing this, we are not taking away any rights from the gay and lesbian community in Indiana."
Well, no, of course not you moron. You aren't taking away rights, you're denying them. Pay attention, Tersesa!
Yoder supporters believe giving Indiana voters the opportunity to add discrimination to the constitution will protect the state's marriage law from the whims of court and legislative decisions.
See, and this is where it gets loony. Indiana already has a ban on gay marriage, but they want it carved in stone so that, no matter what happens anywhere else, no gay man or lesbian will ever, ever be allowed to marry in Indiana.
The Senate has voted several times since 2005 to pass an amendment banning gay marriage, but the House has never cleared those proposals. House Speaker B. Patrick Bauer, D-South Bend, has repeatedly said amending the state's constitution isn't necessary because Indiana law already prohibits same-sex marriage.
You've already deny equality, why pack on more hatred?
Okay, now that I'm done, take a look at Carlin Yoder. Is it me or does he have a little gay-face happening there? Well, what I mean to say, is a little self-loathing-still-deeply-closeted-gay-face? Just sayin'.
I agree with you Bob on the Yoder face. His nose smacks of being broken in a bashing long ago. Oddly enough, if we had equal rights, he might not have been bashed.
ReplyDeleteWell, I took some liberties with his history, but I agree about the face. There is something he's hiding.
If they are so hung up on the word marriage, which most are, then "settle" for partnership. No one is going to go around saying, "Are you civil-partnershiped?" They will say marriage. What is important is equal rights, not a word.
ReplyDeleteYou have far too many people with nothing to do in the US. With all the crap in the world they concentrate on this? Shame on them.
ReplyDeleteDKSmall is right though concerning the words; we legally have 'civil partnerships' in the UK which give us the same rights as straight people. Everyone actually says married/marriage/husband etc. There are a very few people who are still hung up about it but personally I could care less. I was more interested in the equality issue, they can call it tootyfruity if they like.