Sunday, June 21, 2009
Stand by Me - The Power of Collaboration
I considered writing an introduction here, but frankly this amazing video speaks for itself.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Open Letter to President Obama
President Barack Obama
I am writing to express my outrage at the legal brief your administration filed in a California Federal Court defending the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) - a law you promised to repeal when you were running for President.
I am writing to urge you to immediately stop defending DOMA, call for its repeal and instruct the Department of Justice to take any and all actions to support that position, including asking the court to strike the brief from record.
I demand that you immediately call for an end to all discrimination against LGBT Americans, indeed against all Americans, and demonstrate that you are the "fierce" advocate for civil rights you claimed you would be.
One would think you would understand about discrimination which makes it all the more impossible to understand how you can defend any marriage laws that define this domestic partnership as anything more than "between two consenting adults" - the sexual orientation, gender or ethnic background of the two adult parties is irrelevant.
If it is ok to vote on civil rights, and this one in particular, then we should put all possible combinations of all protected classes on the ballot, and ask voters how they feel about blacks and whites marrying for example, or an Hispanic man marrying an African American woman, and every other combination of consenting adults marrying one another. Of course this would be ludicrous, but it is no more ludicrous than voting on whether a gay man can marry another gay man. There is no difference, in principle, between an African American marrying a Caucasian and two men marrying each other.
In a legal context, "marriage" is nothing more than a contract entered into by two adults, yet one for which the government offers special tax breaks and one which has significant immigration implications - which makes this particular contract unique, elevating the two parties to a special legal status. Unfortunately this special contract goes by the religiously charged term "marriage" and invites needless self righteous - and un-constitutional - interference from organized religion. As long as the government offers such an esteemed contract, with all of its privileges, it must be open to all or to none. The government's only proper role with respect to contracts is to uphold them through the judicial system, not to start creating groups and classes that are permitted or restricted from entering into certain contracts. When the government grants favor to some but not others, there is only one word for it, DISCRIMINATION!
The law should recognize only two categories of people, adults and children, and be blind to all groups and classes within the adult category. The governments own anti discrimination laws are therefore in and of themselves discriminatory, by attempting to name all the protected classes that should not be discriminated against - and failing to include everyone. When the law protects individual rights, there is never a conflict between groups, because the smallest minority, the smallest group, is the individual. Protect all individuals' rights and the many groups, past, present and future, will take care of themselves. Enter onto the slippery slope of defining group rights, as separate from individual rights, and you enter a never ending world of pressure group warfare - see Washington DC and our current push-me pull-you political system of lobbying for favors which are handed out based on the economic size, political clout or shear tenacity of any group.
I am writing to express my outrage at the legal brief your administration filed in a California Federal Court defending the discriminatory Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) - a law you promised to repeal when you were running for President.
I am writing to urge you to immediately stop defending DOMA, call for its repeal and instruct the Department of Justice to take any and all actions to support that position, including asking the court to strike the brief from record.
I demand that you immediately call for an end to all discrimination against LGBT Americans, indeed against all Americans, and demonstrate that you are the "fierce" advocate for civil rights you claimed you would be.
One would think you would understand about discrimination which makes it all the more impossible to understand how you can defend any marriage laws that define this domestic partnership as anything more than "between two consenting adults" - the sexual orientation, gender or ethnic background of the two adult parties is irrelevant.
If it is ok to vote on civil rights, and this one in particular, then we should put all possible combinations of all protected classes on the ballot, and ask voters how they feel about blacks and whites marrying for example, or an Hispanic man marrying an African American woman, and every other combination of consenting adults marrying one another. Of course this would be ludicrous, but it is no more ludicrous than voting on whether a gay man can marry another gay man. There is no difference, in principle, between an African American marrying a Caucasian and two men marrying each other.
In a legal context, "marriage" is nothing more than a contract entered into by two adults, yet one for which the government offers special tax breaks and one which has significant immigration implications - which makes this particular contract unique, elevating the two parties to a special legal status. Unfortunately this special contract goes by the religiously charged term "marriage" and invites needless self righteous - and un-constitutional - interference from organized religion. As long as the government offers such an esteemed contract, with all of its privileges, it must be open to all or to none. The government's only proper role with respect to contracts is to uphold them through the judicial system, not to start creating groups and classes that are permitted or restricted from entering into certain contracts. When the government grants favor to some but not others, there is only one word for it, DISCRIMINATION!
The law should recognize only two categories of people, adults and children, and be blind to all groups and classes within the adult category. The governments own anti discrimination laws are therefore in and of themselves discriminatory, by attempting to name all the protected classes that should not be discriminated against - and failing to include everyone. When the law protects individual rights, there is never a conflict between groups, because the smallest minority, the smallest group, is the individual. Protect all individuals' rights and the many groups, past, present and future, will take care of themselves. Enter onto the slippery slope of defining group rights, as separate from individual rights, and you enter a never ending world of pressure group warfare - see Washington DC and our current push-me pull-you political system of lobbying for favors which are handed out based on the economic size, political clout or shear tenacity of any group.
Think in principles, act on principles, and help repeal these discriminatory laws across all the states that ban the legal right to marry the person one loves, for just a few, while offering it to the many! STOP telling us who to love!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)