Saturday, August 29, 2009

We cannot depend on humans to do the right thing when they think god wants them to do something else!



In a recent interview with KUED our new neo-con governor Gary Herbert said the following:

We don't have to have a rule for everybody to do the right thing. We ought to do
the right thing because it's the right thing to do," Herbert said. "Where do you
stop? That's the problem going down that slippery road. Pretty soon we're going
to have a special law for blue-eyed blondes."


This is a ridiculous argument. We have laws and “rules” because we cannot depend on humans to do the right thing. He is implying that we will just not discriminate because it is wrong. He is wrong. Humans do not do the right thing because it is right when they can find a self serving loophole. In Utah god is that scapegoat.

Nationally we have become more accepting of the fact that homosexuality may have a genetic component and that someone who is gay may be normal in that sense. That means they are not an abomination as the mean-spirited Sen. Chris Buttars alleges. I have written at length about my journey in this realization and believe that we have to start asking ourselves:

  • Does this hurt anyone?
  • Am I being forced to participate?
  • How would I feel if I was treated similarly?


What about the threat to marriage? Marriage is often defined as the fabric of our society or the cornerstone of our society. It probably will not surprise most of the readers here that I disagree. I am of the opinion that marriage is the function of claiming property. In the beginning marriage was a tribal way to define a man’s property. Women were chattel to be assigned and controlled by men in the same way livestock and crops were divided and controlled. In today’s society marriage is still a way of making claim to another but with a few modern refinements and a little more equality for women. Civilly it is also the way we divide the property in the marriage when the relationship falls apart. Why cannot gays engage in these civil contracts?


This issue is not about marriage it is about civil rights. It is about not discriminating against a vulnerable minority of our population; a minority that contributes to the success of our state and our nation. I challenge anyone to take god out of the argument here and defend on a secular level why the government should not provide this group with the same protections you and I receive through our majority status.

1 comment: