RECENT  POSTS:  » One of America's most anti-gay organizations rallies for the Duggars; because of course they would » Photo: Stop! Turn around! Don't let NOM force you onto the dead-end pier that is their cause! » One day, two country singers—zero closets » Fringe pro-discrimination group thinks it can stop companies from sponsoring HRC event; adorable » Video: Josh Duggar promoting civil inequality for thousands of grown kids (and counting) » Brian Brown's focus on Kansas, Gov. Brownback shows how much of a political game this is for him » Tiny fraction of North Carolina magistrates choose to free up their days rather than serve local gays » Video: Reality star Josh Duggar leads sad little inequality rally in Little Rock, AR » READ: Federal judge strikes Montana's discriminatory marriage ban » Major global brand P&G comes out for marriage equality  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

04/06/2010

He who 'sins us' vs. sense as it pertains to us

by Jeremy Hooper

No person, LGBT or S, is forced to answer the census in one certain way. It's up to the individual and/or couple to choose the responses that best match their lives. If a religious straight couple is legally married under civil law but for some reason never completed the religious union requisites required by the tenets of their particular faith, then they can choose to define their relationship as being between unmarried partners if they wish. Or if a same-sex couple was legally married under Connecticut civil law but their union is not recognized back home in Nevada, they can still identify as married since that's what they legally are. Or both partners in any situational reality could choose "other relative," if they've chosen to invent some kind of new word that encompasses their love better than any of the other given choices. There is a basic freedom attached to the census process.

And the same sort of freedom goes for race and gender, too. In fact, in the race category there are write-in boxes, so one can identify as purple with pink spots if that's how the person identifies. Others of mixed heritage might strongly identify with one culture, yet no little to nothing about another part of their generational line, and therefore mark down an answer that reflects that fact. Again: Freedom. The kind of freedom that we thought we valued here in America.

But it's a kind of freedom that doesn't sit well with the Family Research Council's Tony Perkins, at least as it applies to gay Tony-Perkinsand lesbian couples of any committal stripe:

"The law should count for something when the Census Bureau counts America's population, but apparently it doesn't on President Obama's watch. The President's Commerce Department is actively encouraging people to ignore U.S. marriage law and invent new definitions for their relationships. What kind of government actively lobbies citizens to lie on their forms?

"When it comes to advancing the extreme homosexual agenda, this White House has no limits, not even the facts. The Defense of Marriage Act forbids the federal government from recognizing same-sex relationships as 'marriages.' If [census PSAs] were honest, [they] would state, 'If you are a same-sex couple, you should mark the box that says 'unmarried partner,' even if you are legally married according to the laws of the state in which you reside.'

"Homosexuals should fill out the census form and be counted, the same as any other Americans. But only Congress - not homosexual activists, not the Census Bureau, and not President Obama and his appointees acting unilaterally - can change federal law.
"
Census Bureau Violates the Defense of Marriage Act; Urges Reporting of False Data [FRC]

Of all the things this man has done to put the government in America's bedrooms, THIS is what brings impropriety questions to his mind? Simple data collection that accurately reflects citizens' identities?! What priorities he has.

Here's a novel idea: Why doesn't Tony stop asking Congress, judges, presidents, and other figures to lie about what "equal protection under the law" means, so that maybe by census 2020 the indignity of even having this conversation will not be one that any gay lips will even have to suffer? Just a suggestion from a legally gay, tax-paying American citizen who's sick and tired of any and every aspect of civil society being turned into an obnoxious referendum on my life!

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails