Tuesday, May 15, 2012

When It Comes to Same Sex Marriage There is no Other Side

'Gay marriage protester outside the Minnesota Senate chamber' photo (c) 2010, Fibonacci Blue - license: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/

As you might well imagine, I read a lot of blogs. I don't always have the time to leave a comment though. This morning I started my daily blog reading, heading to the normal liberal sites, but when I hit Jack and Jill Politics, I have to say that my lip hit the floor.  Jack and Jill normally cuts through the b.s. and gives great commentary, along with some original reporting.  I did not expect to find an article entitled, Why I Don’t Support Same Sex Marriage.  I actually had to double check to make sure I wasn't reading Bossip.

This article was written by Anson Asaka, and was originally published on hir home blog New Possibilities.

The oppression of LGBT people in America does not approach the scale and scope of the oppression of black people. Sexuality is a behavior pattern. Whether or not homosexuality is innate or learned is debatable. Unlike race, sexuality is not necessarily a visible trait. One can easily conceal one’s sexuality. However, one cannot hide being black. It is outrageous for anyone to exploit our history of suffering and pain to further their own unique and unrelated agenda.

Certainly, Martin Luther King, Jr. employed the nonviolent tactics and example of Gandhi to further the Civil Right Movement in America. Both movements shared many similarities. Both movements were fighting against racism and white supremacy. Therefore, a comparison between those two movements is more justified. Furthermore, Dr. King did not use Gandhi’s movement to morally justify the Civil Rights Movement. Instead, Dr. King relied on the Bible, the U.S. Constitution and the Declaration of Independence to morally inspire the movement. I wish the LGBT community would stop pimping our movement to further their cause.

In addition to love, the primary purpose of marriage and sex is reproduction of the human species. In order to sustain strong communities, we must rebuild the most basic and fundamental component of society, the traditional nuclear family. With more than half of all black children being raised in single parent households, our focus should be on rebuilding the traditional family, not jumping on the same sex marriage bandwagon.
I agree that the appropriation of the African-American experience by White GLBT people is appropriation and problematic, but that in no way means that the community is not being denied a civil right.  This is where Anson and I part ways.  The moment ze suggested that the closet is a good thing and that GLBT should and can hide, I was done.  It's bad enough that he went to the trouble of looking up bible passages to declare homosexuality a sin, but the promotion of the closet as a positive is just beyond the pale.


Anson also seems to see same sex marriage as a White thing.  He argues because of the high rate of single motherhood, that we need to focus on "rebuilding the traditional family."  These issues are not related and what he is doing is expressing the oppression of his own people.  It always seems to escape these bigots that Black same gender loving people exist.  Deciding to support a Jim Crow legal system and oppression, actually presents the idea that there are circumstances which support second class citizenship.  As people of the African Diaspora, we have a responsibility to ensure that all members of our community achieve equality under the law.  As Black people, we have suffered and continue to suffer under the yolk of White supremacy; however, the path to our emancipation will not be achieved by oppressing others.  Freedom and power do not equal the freedom to oppress, but the freedom to exist in peace and to make positive change to the world.

I have struggled as a Christian woman to attempt to reconcile my faith and the obvious bigotry and outright hatred expressed by far too many in the Christian faith.  While Anson does not see that what ze is doing is cherry picking phrases to suit hir position, that is exactly what ze is doing. No one, and I don't give a damn how righteous they are, follows all of the rules laid out in the bible.  Anson is only picking these phrases because he wants to judge, condemn and oppress others.  Since when did God need a sidekick to handle hir business?   Where is hir rallying cry about people eating pork and shellfish?  What about mixed fiber clothing?  Nope, those supposed sins, ze can choose to ignore because they benefit hir and the lifestyle ze chooses to lead.  Unlike choosing to wear mix fiber clothing, or filling your stomach with shellfish, being a member of the GLBT community is not a choice.  If you are really a Christian and believe in an infallible God, then it seems to me that since God created GLBT people, that ze is more than happy with hir children, then you should be as well.

I think what bothers me the most is that piece appeared on a supposed liberal blog.  Thankfully, much of the comment section is expressing not only shock, but disgust with the decision to let this post see the light of day on Jack and Jill Politics.  After some thought, I have come to the realization that Jack and Jill has decided to participate in what the media refers to as balanced reporting.  There are issues on which I believe that there is no other side of the debate, and gay marriage certainly qualifies as one.  Anson's entire argument is nothing more than hate speech, masquerading as an opposing opinion.  When you argue that a marginalized community is not entitled to equality under the law, you are expressing your privilege and spouting hate. 

Unlike debating about a tax increase, this position exists solely to oppress a historically marginalized group.  This should not be an issue in which people debate. In fact, I don't even believe that people should be holding a vote on the rights of the GLBT community.  It's ridiculous to vote on civil rights, because we know that historically, the tyranny of the majority means that marginalized people will always be oppressed.  There is a place for fair and balanced reporting, but when the supposed other side must rely upon hate speech, obfuscation and outright lies, you are not having a debate -- or even a conversation -- you are giving bigots a platform.  It comes down to a very simple choice, you are either a hate filled bigot, or you are on the side of the moral right. Allowing pieces like Anson's to see the light of day in a supposed liberal space, is not being fair, it's purposefully sending out misinformation into the world.  Doesn't the U.S. have Fox news for that?