"Charity is commendable, everyone should be charitable. But Justice aims to create a social order in which, if individuals choose not to be charitable, people still don't go hungry, unschooled or sick without care. Charity depends on the vicissitudes of whim and personal wealth, justice depends on commitment instead of circumstance.
Faith-based charity provides crumbs from the table; faith-based justice offers a place at the table"
~Bill Moyers

Friday, October 31, 2008

"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they are doing" - Jesus of Nazareth

The great Roman Lawyer and Orator, Marcus Tullius Cicero once wrote," Just as a builder must have a plan on his paper to build wisely and well, so must a people have a Constitution in order to guide them. But we have abandoned our plan and our map so painfully wrought by our fathers. Hence, we have dictators, men who lust for centralized power in order to oppress us." From Soulmentor's Diary
I also give you these quotes to ponder:
"Individual rights are not subject to a public vote; a majority has no right to vote away the rights of a minority; the political function of rights is precisely to protect minorities from oppression by majorities."

"Fifty-one percent of a nation can establish a totalitarian regime, suppress minorities and still remain democratic."

The voice of the majority is no proof of justice.
-- Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

Any law which violates the indefeasible rights of man is essentially unjust and tyrannical; it is not a law at all.
Maximilien Robespierre

In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.
Mahatma Gandhi

It is bad to be oppressed by a minority, but it is worse to be oppressed by a majority.
Lord Acton

Another thing to ponder and wonder at is: How will pro-immigrant advocates who already voted for, or are voting in favor of Cal's Prop 8, be able to protest anti-immigrant legislation already passed or being proposed in some states and not be hypocritical, or be credible on their stand for human rights and equality for all? Worse yet, how will they be able to keep their self-respect?
Some of what, until now I've called my friends and allies, have or are voting in favor of Cal's Prop 8 - It is very sad to hear their assertions that they are not trying to hurt the LGBT community, or that they are not discriminating, uh?
Earlier today (Thursday Oct. 30) I exchanged emails with a dear friend on this issue, all I could hear are the words of the virulent anti-immigrant forces' spokepersons saying they are not anti-immigrant and that I should be their friend, for the life of me, I can't be that, how can I be a friend with somebody that says something and does something else against my community?
My friend said:
Aurora let!s not be so hard headed , no one is against gay or lesbians , in the first place we are no body to judge you we have to love one to another, the only thing and reazon that I! don!t agree is to get marry . take it as you liked
My reply:
I did, because this is a civil matter where the constitution says all are equal and yet people say, no, we are not and to prove it we will change the constitution so we can deny citizens something that everybody else is entitled to, as you know, there are also many monetary benefits to marriage and those will be denied to a group.
To say I believe all of us are equal and I don't discriminate and then go ahead and do something concrete to discriminate is super hypocritical.
Wait and see when other states change their constitutions to discriminate against immigrants, will you be able to say "I don't believe people should be discriminated against" and keep your self-respect?
Who is being hard headed? The one who is willing to stand for justice and equality for all, or the one who makes exceptions because of religious beliefs or prejudice?
Love one another? I believe Jesus believed in unconditional love and His alleged followers do not, 'love one another' coming from the modern fariseos, AKA christians, that are anything but, reminds me of His words, 'they are like sepulchers, white on the outside but empty inside', and you know what he had to say about hypocrites, he didn't despise others as He did those.
When I hear the christians talk, my stomach turns up and when He comes back, he will ask you about loving one another except when they were different, to keep on saying I love everybody and then turn around to punish a group, in my book, amounts to the epitome of hypocrisy and super hollow.
I'm taking it really bad and I'm learning the true core of some people.
Yes, my friend calls herself a Christian.
Plagiarized from Kossak Soulmentor in his DailyKos Diary Californians: Don't corrupt your Consititution

Cicero was speaking of something that had already happened to the Roman Republic. The last two sentences have not yet happened to Californians, but two years ago it happened to my state of Wisconsin and many others and while there are no resulting dictatorships, the process of corruption of the rule of law has begun. One would hope that Americans of all social and political persuasions would be hesitant to mess with the integrity of our state Constitutions by placing in them, for the first time, amendments that discriminate against a social class as opposed to laws that protect a class or minority.

From whence comes this movement to discriminate against gays and lesbians? Harbor no illusions. Hedge no words. It comes from Religion. Take off the gloves, queer brethren and allies and call it like it is. Religious fundamentalists, under the hypocritical guise of cleaving to a higher law but in actuality seeking to retain their power and influence, have no scruples about corrupting the integrity of the most revered laws of our land, our Consitutions. That they will spend millions to do this, clueless to the fact that they are undermining their own right of religious freedom, is testament to their irrationality.They forget or ignore or never learned the lessons of Germany's Hitler years when cleverly designed creeping corruption of that nation's social/legal fabric was unraveled one populist thread at a time until the only law remaining was Hitler's, the ultimate result of which was world war, the deaths of millions and the utter destruction of Germany.

A more frightening thought is that they know exactly what they are about; an attempt at theocratic rule, and what more populist avenue for that is now available to them than oppression of gays and lesbians using the marriage issue as a political wedge. The sincere belief held by sincerely religious people that "marriage" should be between a man and a woman can and should be respected but messing with a state Consititution to resolve what should be a purely civil dispute is a grave mistake. There are other solutions such as separating the religious aspects of what are essentially sexual/love unions from the civil aspects. That can be done legislatively.

Be mindful of and be warned by Sinclair Lewis who wrote, "When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Citizens of California and America, this is more than a marriage and religion issue. This is a Constitutional issue. Yes on Prop 8 is a first step toward the piecemeal destruction of your Consititutional protections. If the rights of one social class can be pre-empted by Consititutional fiat, who then remains protected?

And anyway, what's the fuss? Think about it. Really. How does a gay marriage threaten your str8 marriage? Prop 8 supporters tell you it does, most of them unthinkingly, but never tell you HOW it does because, of course, it doesn't. Until they can show how it does, you should leave your Constitution alone and vote no on Prop 8.

Do not abandon the wisely wrought and dearly paid for plan. The Prop 8 amendment would damage the spirit of civility that is the glue of any society. It would enshrine a blatantly discriminatory nastiness, a literal sense of foul play into a cornerstone of the American way of life; the Rule of Law. Is that what you really want for California?

Anyway, is there any doubt it would not be the last word on the issue? What obligation, for example, would gays and lesbians have to militarily or politically "protect and defend" a Constitution that does not protect and defend them? Both my sons are military officers who respect my sexuality. Could they be expected to "protect and defend" a Consititution that would not defend the rights of their own father if that similar federal Constitution marriage amendment had passed?

The legal complexities would be exhaustive, the potential for abuse toward an entire social class frightening, and its impact on the civil psyche tragically divisive. A Constitution and the society from which is springs, should be better than that.

"Tolerance is the presumption of superiority, acceptance is a manifestation of love"

No comments:

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to leave a comment, our aim is to publish all comments; the exceptions will be those which advocate violence, threats of violence, spam, and shameless 'pimping' of blogs or sites.

A link to an article or post, in and by itself, does not qualify as a comment.

These comments(?) will be promptly and gleefuly rejected.

It is ok to us if you'd want to publish a link to your blog or website, as long as it is done in an honest way, i.e., in a comment which is to the point and relevant to the post you are commenting on.

I also appreciate your visit very much.

"The Administrator" AKA Aurora

Fare well,

Subscribe to El Rinconcito de Aurora - - Subscribe in a reader
Powered by FeedBurner - - Add to Google Reader or Homepage - Subscribe in podnova -

Back to Top