 |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
|
Civil Rights: more progress necessary
The Advocate
With Martin Luther King Jr. Day on Monday, many of us will briefly reflect on the American civil rights movement. But casual reflection aside, what is the state of civil rights in our country today?
We have come a long way in a relatively short period of time. Many would point out that less than two centuries after the abolishment of slavery we now have a black person as president. Most people are comfortable acknowledging this fact, followed by enjoying a nice, federally sanctioned day off, and then thinking no more on the subject.
Yet, and perhaps this is just my tendency as a student-journalist to look past the surface of a story, just beyond this initial layer of brief happy-go-lucky pseudo-patriotism lays a stark truth: our country, although much more socially advanced than in the past, is still functioning in no small way on a policy of bigotry and hypocrisy.
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
Even our Nobel Prize-winning president holds to some very archaic and, dare I say, discriminatory beliefs. He has stated in the past that he is not against gay rights, but he is against gay marriage. He is not alone in this; people of all ethnic and economic backgrounds seem to agree with him. It is my opinion that our president and anyone who agrees with his approval of gay rights but not gay marriage is acting in a hypocritical fashion.
We live in a diverse country filled with the descendents of persecuted peoples from all walks of life. Take a look back at all our ethnic, political, and religious groups in this country, and not a single one escaped discrimination in either this country or their former home country at some point. Take the descendants of these folks - you and me – and then, while considering this lineage of struggle and strife for nothing more than equality, apply the argument that another group of people from the very same lineage should not have true equality because what they “choose” is against our country’s beliefs. Now tell me that this is not one of the more childish and blatantly hypocritical thing you have ever heard.
I respect Barack Obama and am thrilled to have him as our president, but perhaps now you understand how I can so easily call our protestant, black president a little bit hypocritical when he marginalizes the wants of an equality seeking people.
Obama’s exact stance is this: he is for civil unions for gay couples but not marriage on the grounds that he is a Christian. Fair enough: one’s religious views are their own and I respect his stance despite how much I disagree with it.
But what solutions do I offer? The abolishment of marriage!
Although it may sound extreme, it may be the only way. In America we have a policy of the separation of church and state. Well, it is obvious that at this time the government-sanctioned act of religious union known as marriage is in violation of this policy. It may very well be the duty of all Americans to insure that this policy is upheld; it was, after all, devised to protect religion. Currently every ruling the government makes on marriage is an alteration of what various religious texts have as rules for marriage. I am surprised that this form of government involvement is not seen as invasive by religious communities. The solution to this problem is civil unions for all, which would be handled by government bodies in the exact way marriage is today. Those that wish to consummate the union with a religious ceremony and recognition by their faith could then do so.
Of course the more practical solution is this: Let the gays have a try at marriage. If every marriage is a holy event, think how poorly in the eyes of our respective deities the straight community is doing. If divorce and adultery are an affront to marriage and possibly even a blasphemy, then with the divorce rates in this country so high I am just glad that God apparently ditched that whole fire-and-brimstone attitude of the Old Testament. Perhaps we should let the gays have a shot at marriage; they may even do a better job at it.
The Advocate reserves the right to not publish comments based on their appropriateness.