Tuesday, January 20, 2009

At Least She Waited till After MLK Day

racism, martin luther king, homophobia, prop 8, marriage, gay, homosexual (this is an experiment to see if it makes me more searchable. if you find this completely objectionable, please let me know.)

Our friend Nugget has decided to put words in the mouth of one of the greatest men our country has ever produced- Martin Luther King, Jr. It's easy to do that with dead people, but it doesn't make it less offensive.

Martin Luther King has a dream- gay "marriage" is not a civil right. normally, i don't pick apart titles, but they're not normally this bad. where to start? Martin Luther King, Jr.; HAD a dream, being dead, he no longer "has" anything; why is marriage in quotes? if she keeps this up, i'll start putting quotes around "intelligent", "educated" and "informed" when i refer to her nuggetyness.

Martin Luther King, Jr., had a dream. A commendable dream; a dream that has not only been realized, but has radically changed the course of history in its fulfillment. And now, almost 46 years later, Martin Luther King, Jr., champion of civil rights, speaks to homophobic marriage defenders from the grave to reiterate that dream in a different context. if MLK is now speaking to you from the grave, i want an audio file. Gay “marriage” "interesting" is another word i will now put in quotes in reference to the nuggelicious one is not a civil right. A country that makes special concessions for sexual attractions and orientations is a country consciously heading for troubled waters, not freedom and justice. "special concessions"? you mean like the tax benefits, inheritance benefits, hospital visitation rights and health insurance coverage i currently enjoy as a married person? it's not special if everyone has it, asshat! oh, wait . . . i get it, that's your point. Says Shelby Steele of the Wall Street Journal in her BWAHAHAHAHAHA Shelby is one of those unisex names, like Leslie. It's called "research" essay entitled, Selma to San Francisco?:

“Dressing gay marriage in a suit of civil rights has become the standard way of selling it to the broader public. actual, it is about civil rights. gays are born the way they are, just like blacks or women. gays can no more stop being gay than i can stop being a woman, or Saul Williams can stop being black. so, why are we denying a group the exact same rights the rest of us enjoy because of something they can't change? we allow alcoholics to marry. why don't we ask them to stop drinking first? born gay, too bad, suckah! Here is an extremely awkward issue having to do with the compatibility of homosexuality and the institution of marriage. what incompatibility? and what about the incompatibility of drug addiction and marriage? abuse and marriage? dishonesty and marriage? (why do we want gay people to lie, marry heteros and make everyone involved miserable? why is that good? i just don't get bigotry, i guess.) But once this issue is buttoned into a suit of civil rights a satin lavender suit!, neither homosexuality nor marriage need be discussed. i'd be happy about that. gay people probably don't spend this much of their time thinking about gay sex. honestly.

Suddenly only equity and fairness matter. yeah! oh, this is bad? okay, can somebody please explain hatred to me? And this turns gay marriage into an ersatz civil rights struggle so that dissenters are seen as Neanderthals standing in the schoolhouse door, fighting off equality itself. yes, that is how i see dissenters, cause that's who you are. funny, usually i have to say that. Yet all this civil rights camouflage is, finally, a bait-and-switch: When you agree to support fairness, you end up supporting gay marriage.” reframe the argument all you want, asshat, it's still about civil rights. unless you're trying to say that civil rights are for blacks alone. i'm pretty sure that wasn't MLK's dream.

“But gay marriage is simply not a civil rights issue. It is not a struggle for freedom. equality, anyone? we got ours, now get in the back of the bus, suckah? It is a struggle of already free people not free to marry, now are they. somewhat free, mostly free is not the same as free. for complete social acceptance and the sense of normalcy that follows thereof--a struggle for the eradication of the homosexual stigma. i would like that, too. hating people for being as they were born is like, well, hating people for the color of their skin. you'd think i would't have to point that out on today of all days. Marriage is a goal because, once open to gays, it would establish the fundamental innocuousness of homosexuality itself. explain to me how homosexuality is not innocuous? how is homosexuality effecting you at all? in fact, if you would stop obsessing about it . . . Marriage can say like nothing else that sexual orientation is an utterly neutral human characteristic, like eye-color. yeah, it is. my brown eyes aren't affecting you either. Thus, it can go far in diffusing the homosexual stigma.” the stigma's in your mind, buddy.

“The civil rights movement argued that it was precisely the utter innocuousness of racial difference that made segregation an injustice.
how is gay less innocuous than black? seriously, how? you find gay sex icky, so it's bad? lots of people found black icky. just sayin' Racism was evil all bigotry is evil, not just bigotry that affects you. because it projected a profound difference where there was none -- white supremacy, black inferiority -- hetero supremacy, gay inferiority (they're immature! promiscuous! selfish!) for the sole purpose of exploiting blacks. some people always need someone further down the ladder. But there is a profound difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality. what, exactly? once you get down to brass tacks, the difference between gays and straights is every bit as "profound" as the difference between black and white. suck it. In the former, sexual and romantic desire is focused on the same sex, in the latter on the opposite sex. wow, that's profound. Natural procreation is possible only for heterosexuals most heterosexuals. if that's what we're using as the basis for marriage, i propose that all heteros be tested for fertility prior to marriage. infertile people will not be allowed to marry., a fact of nature that obligates their sexuality to no less a responsibility than the perpetuation of the species. there are over 6,000,000,000 people on the planet, we're not dying out. calm down. Unlike racial difference, these two sexual orientations are profoundly--not innocuously--different. i'm beginning to think this guy doesn't really know what those words mean. Racism projects a false difference in order to exploit. Homophobia is a reactive prejudice against a true and firm difference that already exists.”

Yes, folks, a black man just said that racism is bad, but homophobia is good. i bet Martin Luther King, Jr. is very proud.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are for you guys, not for me. Say what you will. Don't feel compelled to stay on topic, I enjoy it when comments enter Tangentville or veer off into Non Sequitur Town. Just keep it polite, okay?

I am attempting to use blogger's new comment spam feature. If you don't immediately see your comment, it is being held in spam, I will get it out next time I check the filter. Unless you are Dennis Markuze, in which case you're never seeing your comment.

Creative Commons License
Forever in Hell by Personal Failure is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
Based on a work at foreverinhell.blogspot.com.