Scooter Soon to be Covered by Americans with Disabilities Act
Finally, there is good news coming from some of the leaders of the Southern Baptist Convention. That good news is? Science exists. The Reverend Albert Mohler Jr. of the SBC recently acknowledged that in the near future scientific research will show that homosexuality (I prefer the term gayness) is biological in nature. Is this possibly the beginning of the end of the anti-gay religious right?Wait! Put down your streamers. It's not time to celebrate just yet.
According to the good reverend, such findings wouldn't really change that much. Proof of a biological basis would not change his (or his followers) condemnation of homosexuality (It's in the Bible after all). So the way I see it, their new argument won't be, "Gayness is a choice" it will be, "Yes God made you this way, but in the eyes of God you shouldn't be this way".
You've put the streamers down haven't you? Well maybe now is the time also put down that tambourine you were so joyfully waiving around 2 minutes ago. Reverend Mohler Jr. ain't done yet. And I bet you'll never guess where he's going next.
If science can prove that homosexuality is biological, then science can also be used to CURE GAY BABIES! He goes on to say, "I realize this sounds very offensive to homosexuals, but it's the only way a Christian can look at it."
No shit its offensive but guess what? I'm kinda used to right wingers saying offensive things about my "lifestyle." Plus, if you really think about it, such a change in position is a serious blow to the anti-gay movement which has based its entire movement on the premise that gayness is a choice. I see Right-Wing senators having a tough arguing against ENDA (that's the Employment Non-discrimination Act) saying, "Yes they were born this way, but we could have 'fixed' them so they shouldn't be protected." After all, a lot of deafness can now be "fixed" and you don't see bigots on the floor of the senate trying to trample on their rights.
PLUS, if I was born this way, and it is according to these people some sort of disorder does that mean I should be covered under the American with Disabilities Act? If that's the case maybe we could demand our own bathrooms (with disco balls, and house music). We could also insist that mullets and wife-beater tank tops be outlawed since they offend our fashionable tendencies (that we were born with). I could also collect social security for my disability. I'd be RICH! All in all the future is looking bright (and fabulous) for Scooter!
Labels: Crazy, gays and lesbians
posted by scooterlulu at 11:31 AM
6 Comments:
I’ve believed for a while that the focus on whether or not “gayness” was a choice was a red herring that would eventually hurt the gay-rights movement. (Not to mention how such a focus adds to the de facto marginalization of bi-sexuals, who could theoretically “choose” to focus on the opposite gender.) The focus should be on the fact that it does not effect, let alone hurt, anyone except for you and your consenting partner, and since that is the case, it is none of the government’s business. The role of government is to protect the interests of its citizens. You are a citizen; you deserve equal protection whether or not the person you want to spend your life with shares your gender. Choice or biology should not be a factor in government protection. By focusing so much on insisting on biological origins, the gay-rights movement has allowed the anti-rights movement to dominate the framing of the issue. As such, we’ve allowed the rug to be pulled out from under us and no one to blame but ourselves.
1:18 PM
I hope the Gay Bathroom doesn't have to deal with the mysterious messes of the Poopacabra that I and the other women in my office must face in our bathroom on a daily basis.
You should also find a reason to demand ramps. They are easier than stairs. -Lulu
1:38 PM
howlingjay,
I completely agree with the point you make. The matter of choice shouldn't matter. Individuals choose what religion they are, and that choice is respected and protected by law. So how is sexuality different?
That said, i'm not sure how effective this argument would be anymore now that, as you point out, the debate has been framed as one of choice. If only over the past 10 years the progressive response to "homosexuality is a choice" was "so what, isn't your religion a choice also" instead of "no it isn't" especially when neither side really has (at the moment) any compelling evidence to prove their point.
what do you think?
-scooter
1:44 PM
Amen Rev. Scooter!
1:45 PM
Scooter, you make a good point. I have to feel though that we really should have been, or, since you can't change the past, should in the future, insist that since this is our issue, we should frame the debate. Progressives have lost ground to the conservatives every time we allow them reframe a topic and we need to stop. They are effectively shifting what is viewed as "center" farther and farther to the right and controlling the Overton Window. Instead of waiting for to hear their platform so our platform can be to rebut it, we need to pick a spot and hold our ground and insist that the argument be on our terms (on that note, yay to Edwards and Richardson to refusing to debate on Fox News.)
All that being said, really the best way to change minds is face to face, not platform to platform. Meet your neighbors; show them you are a friendly normal person and not the deviant they paint you as. (As much as I love a good pride parade, they don't always help on that front.) As an example, I offer my conservative catholic grandmother, who recently visited my "west coast" aunt and went to a party where she my aunt and one guy's mother where the only woman, and the only straight people there. She had a blast. Nothing I could have ever said to her in abstract could have changed her mind better than just spending time with people, and seeing them as people.
Sorry for the crazy long post, guess I live up to my handle...
2:23 PM
Perfect response howlingjay,
I think a perfect example of this are the responses that Clinton (Hillary that is) and Obama made when asked if they believed homosexuality is immoral. They skirted around the issue because the right has effectively shifted what is the "center" so that saying, "no, i dont think it is" becomes a "leftist out-there position"
Kudos to John Edwards though, for avoiding the political tap dance and just answering the question. I like that man more and more every day.
-scooter
2:45 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home