I’ll take a little discrimination with a side of hypocrisy to go. Thanks!

Hi there, it’s Repowoman. I was gonna take a stab at the whole video post thing, but an audio failure prevented me from doing so. Oh well.


I wanna start out by giving a shout-out to my home state: download (11)

Hiya Michigan! What the fuck??! With Virginia’s constitutional amendment being declared unconstitutional (on Valentine’s Day, no less) , we are now the ONLY state that has an amendment banning same-sex marriage, civil unions, domestic partnerships, and all other contracts.

Fucking awesome! The mitten state, America’s high five to the world, is sufficiently giving its citizens a giant middle finger.

Progress? No! That’s talk of the devil!

Okay, well, to be fair, we are awaiting a ruling from a US Federal judge regarding a lawsuit filed by a couple in Detroit. LGBT-Adoption-Rights-by-State-InfographicThey have adopted children, separately, and want to adopt each other’s children, so that if anything should happen, the children would stay with the remaining parent and not go back into the foster care system.

But, Michigan won’t allow that. Michigan does not allow same-sex partner adoption. Because, you know, it’s so much better to rip that child from a loving family and put them back in the system. So they went to the judge and said, ‘how fair is this shit?’

And the judge says “I’m inclined to believe it’s not fair at all, but if you challenge Michigan’s ban on same-sex marriage, I bet you’ll get even further!”

So they did. And the judge told them he was going to wait to see how the Supreme Court ruled on DOMA. When the Supreme Court said DOMA sucked and was unconstitutional, the Federal judge here said, “Cool. Well, I wanna hear from some experts.”

And now, on February 25th, 2014, the Federal judge will listen to experts testify.

Because it’s not enough to listen to the parents of these kids.

I should be happy, though, because he is at least hearing the case. But how long will we have to wait before this is a marriage-scales-of-justicenon-issue in this state? In 2004, when Prop 2 was passed, it was passed with a 58% majority. Now, a poll done in May of 2013, shows a 56% support for same-sex marriage. Gay rights activists are looking to petition to have the ban overturned, with a ballot drive in 2016.

Why? Why do we have to wait 12 years for someone to say “Hey, this isn’t right, let’s fix this”? Why do we have to wait 12 years for a fucked up constitutional amendment that was painfully redundant to be overturned?

But, it doesn’t end here. With each step forward, there is someone trying to push us back.

download (12)Kansas has decided that so-called ‘religious freedom’ trumps the basic human right of equality. They’re looking to pass legislation that will allow for absolute discrimination against the LGBTQ community on the basis of ‘religious freedom’.

Yup, the ‘Because God said I could’ movement of discrimination is picking up steam. They’re using the argument that the First Amendment gives them the right to refuse service to anyone they feel ‘violates their beliefs’.

Okay you fucking Bible-thumpers. Here’s the deal. The First Amendment is not a tool for you to use to discriminate against anyone. Freedom of religion, as per the Constitution, means the government can’t force you to practice a particular religion. If you want to be Jewish, be Jewish, if you’re a Catholic, that’s great! If you’re an atheist – more power to ya! But that still does NOT give you the right to refuse service to someone based on their sexual orientation.

Let’s reverse the roles. Say you walk into a business. You wanna buy some flowers for your dead grandmother. The

'These were on their last leg, ma. Just like you!'
‘These were on their last leg, ma. Just like you!’

business owner of the floral shop is an atheist, and refuses to sell to you because he thinks you’re an idiot for putting flowers on a grave of a bunch of bones.

What are you gonna do? Stand outside and pray for his fucking salvation? No. You’re gonna go find a lawyer, and sue his non-believing ass, right? You’re gonna picket outside of his business and tell people that it’s blasphemy to step foot beyond that threshold.

So what gives you the right to do it to someone else? Where in your Bible does it say to turn away from people who need your services? Where does Jesus say “Go ahead and tell the gays you don’t want them around”?

I don’t think he does. In fact, from everything I’ve ever read, Jesus was a pretty cool guy who accepted everyone for who they were. No exceptions.

So this bullshit about freedom of religion? You’re wrong. You do have freedom of religion. And until someone violates your ability to practice your religion or tells you that you can’t practice your religion, you still have freedom of religion. And no, my ‘gay agenda’ is not infringing upon your religious rights. Mostly, because we don’t have an agenda. Unless you consider equality an agenda. Oh, we’re such sneaky homos…

Newsflash, Kansas…This law isn’t going to stand in front of the Supreme Court. There’s this lovely amendment that trumps your ideas of what the First Amendment says. The Fourteenth Amendment – the one that guarantees us life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Yeah, that’s sorta like your worst nightmare, isn’t it? Your ‘religious freedoms’ are trampling all over my ability to live and to have liberty, and certainly, your bigotry and discrimination is a massive roadblock in my pursuit of happiness.

Enforcing-the-ten-commandmentsYour brand of pseudo-Christianity is severely lacking in substance and realism. I’m sure that nowhere in the Ten Commandments does it say “Thou shall practice hypocrisy and hatred.”

If your religion says that it’s perfectly okay to turn away another human being in need…I don’t want to prescribe to your religion…

And you wonder why I’m agnostic.

2 thoughts on “I’ll take a little discrimination with a side of hypocrisy to go. Thanks!

  1. tiffany267 February 16, 2014 / 5:10 am

    As you will tell from reading my blog, I’m radically in favor of LGBT rights, and I’m glad that you’re writing about marriage equality. However I’m compelled to call you out on your other subject. No one has a right to force anyone to provide a service someone doesn’t want to provide, even if that person’s reasons are repulsively irrational. Under individual rights, we have the power to choose any other provider we want, and we have the power to shame a bigoted business with letters to the editor, petitions, and boycotts. But forcing them takes us a step too far.

    You referenced the 1st Amendment multiple times. You apparently failed to read all of it. There are two sections which refer to religion: free exercise and establishment. Free exercise means just that. Individuals have a constitutional right to pursue the free exercise of their religious idiocy without legal persecution. You and I may not like that there are people whose mission in life is to practice stupid, offensive theological mandates, but it’s their right.

    Let’s take your hypothetical scenarios and turn the table. Suppose that you are a small-business owner. Perhaps you make cakes. In walks a Westboro Baptist Church nutjob who orders a cake for a rally which reads “God hates fudge”. (I can’t bring myself to write the actual word.) Anyway obviously it would be deeply against your personal/religious values to make such a cake. You have a right to freely exercise your values precisely as the WBC people do. You have every natural right to refuse their order and to refuse to serve them or their kind ever again. Tragically, anti-discrimination laws would force you to comply with their whims or risk losing your business and facing fines and/or imprisonment.

    Though fighting discrimination by private businesses and individuals is a worthy goal, doing so as a legal threat muddies up your moral higher ground. Many of today’s most successful companies have already developed diversity initiatives that are much more rigorous than state or federal law. Why? It’s good business! They want to attract more markets, they want to attract and keep more talented employees, and they know that the way to do that is with inclusive and respectful policies and strategies. Only the smallest-minded of companies are committed to bigotry, and in a free market these backward folks would be left to wallow in their own filthy, self-induced poverty as they hated on human progress.

    Thanks for covering the issues. Hope you will consider reading some of my posts on LGBT rights.


  2. repowoman30 February 16, 2014 / 9:51 am

    I understand where you’re coming from. But when you take a look at the type of legislation Kansas is looking to pass into law, it would allow someone to refuse such things as medical treatment and food to a gay or lesbian. My question is, where in the Christian Bible does it say that it’s okay to allow your fellow man to die because of their sexual orientation?

    To me, religious beliefs and religious values are two different things. The pending legislation in Kansas is allowing discrimination, hell, it’s promoting it.

    When I write, I put my words out there for anyone to read. I don’t limit the potential diversity of my readers. If you own a business, you’re providing a service. If I owned a bakery, and someone from the WBC came in and ordered a cake, I’d make one for them. I’d donate the money they paid for the cake to an LGBTQ cause, but I’d make the cake for them nonetheless.

    Why? Because I own a business. We deal daily with people we don’t like, but we do it because it’s necessary. Or we avoid them. Segregation, separate but equal – those are insulting, lame-horse attempts at equality.

    I’ve been fired from a job for my sexual orientation. Actually, for the assumption of my sexual orientation. It was one of the most humiliating experiences of my life. And I had no recourse. I was humiliated, belittled, and hurt, and I had no way to make any of it right. Why? Because there were no anti-discrimination laws in place.

    Reynolds v. United States (1878) – Chief Justice Waite wrote: “Freedom of religion means freedom to hold an opinion or belief, but not to take action in violation of social duties or subversive to good order,”

    Just like a business cannot fire someone if their religion requires they dutifully observe the Sabbath, a business should not be allowed to refuse service to someone of the LGBTQ community. We’ve done our best to end discrimination against skin and sex, why is gender identity and sexual orientation not worthy of the same treatment?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s