« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
07/28/2009
'Gays don't face discrimination,' says she who represents gay-discriminatory group
This is how Patti Anker, a representative for the Concerned Women For America of Alaska, recently detailed Ordinance 64, a statewide measure that could bring a ban on discrimination based on sexual orientation to Palin country:
"This ordinance is not about equality, it is about special rights," Patti told the Assembly. "Homosexuals have no immutable characteristics like skin color, no economic deprivation, no suffering from a long history of discrimination, and no political powerlessness." Patti pointed out the spurious comparison of the homosexual "rights" campaign to the civil rights movement. "African-Americans should be offended at the audacity of this special interest group to … equate the grievous sufferings of those who were forced to take their battle for equality to the streets."
On a practical note, Patti asked the Assemblymen if any impact studies had been done to determine the effect of this ordinance on the community at large. The Assembly doesn't have systematic "documented cases where someone has been denied access to education, housing, or employment," Patti said.
Lastly, and "most significantly and personally, this ordinance threatens my civil liberties," Patti argued. Patti is a kindergarten teacher at a private school and fears that teaching her students about God's design for marriage would constitute a hate crime under the new ordinance.
Small Actions Make A Big Difference [CWA]
Ain't it interesting how the white, hetero, Christian social conservatives always have soooooo much more insight into LGBT existence, and how our discrimination relates to the bigger civil rights picture? And by "interesting," we of course mean "intensely frustrating," as in: "OMG -- HOW DARE THEY SPEAK ABOUT A HUMAN EXPERIENCE THAT THEY'VE (A) NEVER LIVED WITHIN AND (B) DEDICATE THEIR LIVES TO DECRYING?!?!"
But then again, what would we know? After all, we're just gays who don't want to ever see a gay man murdered the way our college pal Joe was murdered, are heart-sickened by the stories of gay kids who kill themselves because of bullying, are enraged by not enjoying the exact same rights and benefits as our heterosexual peers, want the right to fight for our country without hiding our spouses, would like to visit certain states without intense fear, don't find it fun to be called 'fags' while simply walking down the street, and are sick of countless families being torn apart because of longheld biases are seeking special rights. You've totally got our community's number, Ms. Anker!!
**Oh, and in CWA's piece, they casually talk about the rest of the "sea of citizens wearing red shirts" who showed up at the Assembly to show opposition to ordinance 64. Yea, well, head over to The Mudflats blog to see what some of this opposition looked like:
*PHOTOS: Anchorage Assembly on Ordinance 64. Round IV - Pictures [The Mudflats]
Your thoughts
I love that "racist" is spelled "rascist" on that shirt. I don't know, could they show their ignorance any more?
Posted by: Christy | Jul 28, 2009 2:23:48 PM
She's right. Homosexuals were never opressed in any way. If you don't count laws that made consensual sex between adults a criminal offence in some states.
Bigotry really does make people dumber, doesn't it?
Posted by: Bill S | Jul 28, 2009 4:27:24 PM
Nope 'rascist' is totally correct. It is defined as a bias held against raspberries. Everyone knows pink fruits are immoral. >>snicker<<
Posted by: Ashton | Jul 29, 2009 12:20:56 AM
The shirt was meant to be a joke because of all the similar ad hominem attacks that homosexual activists and other leftists make against most of those people who dare to disagree with one or more of their cherished positions, especially their positions regarding the leftist mantra of sex, race, gender, and class.
Posted by: Tom S. | Sep 2, 2009 4:34:29 PM
Oh please. Some on the far-right are wearing these kinds of "ad hominem attacks" as badges of honor. It's scary.
Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 3, 2009 7:52:47 AM
@ Tom S.
Although you're probably used to hanging out with people who don't understand logical or analytical thinking, we KNOW what the point of the shirt is. That's what we're making fun of.
Posted by: Chris | Nov 17, 2009 11:22:43 PM
comments powered by Disqus
