From: Michael S. Lorrey (mlorrey@datamann.com)
Date: Fri Dec 08 2000 - 09:28:29 MST
Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
> "Michael S. Lorrey" wrote:
>
> > Sorry Harvey, I just don't accept claims of widespread rural bigotry at
> > the level you claim, except possibly in the rural South or other areas
> > of strong Klan influence (if they communities you speak of were such,
> > then I suppose that helps explain it). Working in Vermont as I do, with
> > the current Civil Union controversy raging, it has turned out that all
> > of the overt 'hate' crimes committed here since the 'Take Back Vermont'
> > grassroots campaign began were actually committed by gays trying to gain
> > sympathy. A gay priest, for example, torched his own car in a ploy to
> > enrage the community against conservative opposition, and it was a few
> > Darthmouth students who painted swastikas on a few street signs in
> > Norwich as a ploy to promote a 'diversity celebration' they had planned.
> > I know its rather stereotypical of me to say this, but these individuals
> > are only reinforcing prejudices about 'drama queens', and are doing
> > their cause no good.
>
> Their cause? I was under the impression that objective law applied
> equally to all was in everyone's interest. If we act like it is "our
> cause" then we are guilty according to your lights of fragmenting the
> community and being self-involved. If we point out that it is simple
> equal rights everyone says we are claiming "special rights". Yet out of
> your own mouth you see the call for equality under the law being
> something for us perhaps against others.
Did I say I was opposed to civil unions? No, I didn't. I am, in fact,
for them, but because I'm not gay, it isn't really 'my cause', unless I
want to form a civil union with my sister or mother or brother, etc
(which is the unmentioned other half of the civil unions law). Most of
the population will NEVER be convinced that the definition of marriage
is anything other than a union between a man and woman for purposes of
producing children in a legally protected arena. Its not about a
contract of mutual enslavement, or strictly about financial
incorporation as a partnership, or to justify a purely emotional
relationship between two people. That is not to say that there are not
instruments for people to gain legal sanction for any of those
activities either, but they are not about what marriage is about. Many
lawyers will say a business partnership is 'like a marriage'. But they
will not say that it is in fact a marriage. The two are very distinctly
different things.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 15:32:15 MST