I pulled the pull cord on my engine earlier tonight and the motor revved up again. Little engine that couldn't? Psssht! Who's that? Not me.
So the debate tonight was something else that has compelled me stay up past my bed time, blood shot eyes and greasy needs-to-shower skin to rant and rave in my longest and most grueling blog post yet.
The core of it oriented around Equality Utah presenting arguments in support of why the Utah State Legislature should pass legislation associated with the Common Ground Initiative, while the Sutherland Institute debated why these bills should not be passed.
The debate began with opening comments by each side, followed by a question-and-answer exchange between both teams. The debate concluded with a terrifying Q&A from audience members (Seriously. There was an audience member who actually shouted out that gays should want to go to prison because they would get more action and another audience member compared same-sex marriage to a man having sex with his horse.)
Will Carlson from Equality Utah gave the first opening comments, which focused on how most Utahns agree that gay and trans Utahns deserve basic legal protections, such as the right not to be fired, evicted from where you live, to have some legal recourse if a partner is killed by the negligence of another (e.g. a drunk driver), visitation rights in a hospital (during medical emergencies, for example, only immediate family are allowed), etc.
Then Paul Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute, gave his opening comments: "We disagree not only with your views, but with every motivation that goes into those bills" and went on to say that the "two sides live in different realities".
According to Mero, sexual orientation is an illusion where people who think otherwise are living in a fantasy land. "Sexual orientation is an illusion...your idea of rights is an illusion...You think a piece of paper, will make you a family.. You think that love makes you a family."
He went on to state that finding any common ground “is impossible.”
He also went on to argue that God's natural order has been around for a very long time - there are "men and women" and two distinct genders that are appropriately expressed. Don't wear pants, ladies! God forbids it!
I couldn't help but wonder what he meant by an "illusion", exactly. Same-sex couples who have been together for 50+ years and have raised children are illusions, just playing house and not actually families worthy of rights (i.e. protection) or recognition?
Wow, Mero. Really? Here they were, talking about "respect" and "civility" while, in the same sentence, telling us that our families aren't real and that our identities are illusions to mask what are actually delinquent sexual behaviors and choices (First off, I have a hard time believing that a child in a fiercely homophobic LDS family would choose to engage in a 'sexual behavior' that would lead to being ostracized by family, friends, and community; but, even if it was, this argument is so painfully fallible - isn't religion a choice? Should it be legal to fire someone because of their religion, or legal to kick them out of their home?)
When the question segment began, it was mostly what I'd expected it would be. The equality side would reiterate how common ground is not about same-sex marriage, but about protecting gay and trans Utahns from forms of discrimination that aren't "illusions". They also pointed out how the bills aren't even gay and trans specific, but that heterosexuals and society in general also benefit from equality.
The Sutherland side addressed the employment concern by arguing that, if someone feels they have been discriminated against, they have legal recourse to file a complaint about it, just like someone who's been sexually harassed or discriminated against in any other way. That's between them and their employers, and why should the government have to be involved?
I suppose all of that effort to have individuals protected from racism, alblism, sexism, etc., in the workplace were fruitless, seeing as, if a woman is being sexually harassed, the government shouldn't intervene to protect her! Instead she should just talk to her employers about it, work it out. It's up to them to deal with it, and it's the employer's right to discriminate as they choose.
Will responded that for those who have been fired for being gay or trans in Utah, they can file complaints all they want but nothing will happen because, as it had been mentioned numerous times before, it's legal in Utah to fire someone due entirely based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. An employer could come right out and say, "I fired her because she's trans!" and it would and has been entirely legal.
It was brought up more than once how gay and trans people don't need the government to "grant rights" in order for LGBT people to live happy, content lives. Senator Scott McCoy from the Equality side clarified how the government "grants rights" in order to protect people. Civil rights activists didn't ask for legal protections in order to force everyone to love someone based on ethnicity, but in order to not be legally discriminated against. There's a point to government protection. It's not privilege when you're experiencing the oppressed, minority class side of the coin.
On the Sutherland side there was also a woman who's name I can't remember for the life of me. She is a social worker and professor at Brigham Young University who attested that she had read numerous statistics about how "harmful" non-traditional families are; where the children are more prone to "risk".
It's unfortunate to me that, from someone who works with young people and who is employed to help them, she translates that problems children who don't fit the heteronormative mold endure, like experiencing more verbal and physical harassment, the loss of effort and achievement, suicide attempts (which are three times as likely to occur in gay youth than in their heterosexual counterparts) are a byproduct of "the gay lifestyle" and not of homophobia and lacking support in their communities. The worst being the lack of parental support, which I suspect isn't always intentional but, unlike other minority groups, parents of gay or trans children are often not members of the minority to which their children belong.
Anyway, I think the highlight of the evening was a response from Will Carlson in regards to the Sutherland side going on and on about how, statistically,same-sex relations were "more promiscuous", are at a "higher risk for STDs" and "have relationships that generally only last about 1 or 2 years". Carlson replied to Mr. Mero, "You know, lesbians have the lowest disease rate of any relationship. So if that is the goal, only lesbians should be allowed to be intimate!"
This compels me to post a video from a friend's blog. I wonder if all of these families realize that they're just illusions?
Gadz! I was so heated up from this debate that I almost forgot to do my injection! Today was injection day! Woo!
It went well, but this time it was more painful than usual. Generally when I slide the needle in I don't feel it, but this time I had to actually put a substantial amount of pressure on the needle to get it to pierce the flesh of my thigh.
I could then feel it piercing through layers of muscle. I made sure to pull the syringe back a bit to see if any blood oozed in but, when it didn't, I continued to press the needle in and injected the prescribed thick T goop. My leg is still throbbing a bit. I suspect it may be due to the fact that I've been injecting in my right thigh every time, so I'll try switching to my left thigh next time. Then I can hopefully revert to the good ol' slides-in-like-butta days.
*photo courtesy of Salt Lake Tribune
So the debate tonight was something else that has compelled me stay up past my bed time, blood shot eyes and greasy needs-to-shower skin to rant and rave in my longest and most grueling blog post yet.
The core of it oriented around Equality Utah presenting arguments in support of why the Utah State Legislature should pass legislation associated with the Common Ground Initiative, while the Sutherland Institute debated why these bills should not be passed.
The debate began with opening comments by each side, followed by a question-and-answer exchange between both teams. The debate concluded with a terrifying Q&A from audience members (Seriously. There was an audience member who actually shouted out that gays should want to go to prison because they would get more action and another audience member compared same-sex marriage to a man having sex with his horse.) Will Carlson from Equality Utah gave the first opening comments, which focused on how most Utahns agree that gay and trans Utahns deserve basic legal protections, such as the right not to be fired, evicted from where you live, to have some legal recourse if a partner is killed by the negligence of another (e.g. a drunk driver), visitation rights in a hospital (during medical emergencies, for example, only immediate family are allowed), etc.
Then Paul Mero, the president of the Sutherland Institute, gave his opening comments: "We disagree not only with your views, but with every motivation that goes into those bills" and went on to say that the "two sides live in different realities".
According to Mero, sexual orientation is an illusion where people who think otherwise are living in a fantasy land. "Sexual orientation is an illusion...your idea of rights is an illusion...You think a piece of paper, will make you a family.. You think that love makes you a family."
He went on to state that finding any common ground “is impossible.”
He also went on to argue that God's natural order has been around for a very long time - there are "men and women" and two distinct genders that are appropriately expressed. Don't wear pants, ladies! God forbids it!
I couldn't help but wonder what he meant by an "illusion", exactly. Same-sex couples who have been together for 50+ years and have raised children are illusions, just playing house and not actually families worthy of rights (i.e. protection) or recognition?
Wow, Mero. Really? Here they were, talking about "respect" and "civility" while, in the same sentence, telling us that our families aren't real and that our identities are illusions to mask what are actually delinquent sexual behaviors and choices (First off, I have a hard time believing that a child in a fiercely homophobic LDS family would choose to engage in a 'sexual behavior' that would lead to being ostracized by family, friends, and community; but, even if it was, this argument is so painfully fallible - isn't religion a choice? Should it be legal to fire someone because of their religion, or legal to kick them out of their home?)
When the question segment began, it was mostly what I'd expected it would be. The equality side would reiterate how common ground is not about same-sex marriage, but about protecting gay and trans Utahns from forms of discrimination that aren't "illusions". They also pointed out how the bills aren't even gay and trans specific, but that heterosexuals and society in general also benefit from equality.
The Sutherland side addressed the employment concern by arguing that, if someone feels they have been discriminated against, they have legal recourse to file a complaint about it, just like someone who's been sexually harassed or discriminated against in any other way. That's between them and their employers, and why should the government have to be involved?
I suppose all of that effort to have individuals protected from racism, alblism, sexism, etc., in the workplace were fruitless, seeing as, if a woman is being sexually harassed, the government shouldn't intervene to protect her! Instead she should just talk to her employers about it, work it out. It's up to them to deal with it, and it's the employer's right to discriminate as they choose.
Will responded that for those who have been fired for being gay or trans in Utah, they can file complaints all they want but nothing will happen because, as it had been mentioned numerous times before, it's legal in Utah to fire someone due entirely based on their sexual orientation or gender identity. An employer could come right out and say, "I fired her because she's trans!" and it would and has been entirely legal.
For example, just recently in Utah a trans woman named Krystal Etsitty who had worked as a bus driver for the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) was fired. In Etsitty v. Utah Transit Authority, 2007 WL 2774160 (10th Cir. Sept. 20, 2007), the Tenth Circuit ruled that a transsexual is not protected by Title VII as a class and that this particular plaintiff could not establish "Price Waterhouse" gender non-conformity discrimination.
See, Etsitty's trouble stemmed from her use of women's restrooms along her bus routes. Her supervisors claimed that she was fired due to their concern about the possibility of public concern and potential liability stemming from Etsitty's use of women's restrooms while retaining male genitalia (she couldn't afford or didn't desire genital reconstruction surgery, which is common amongst trans people. My blog post about this.) Nothing had actually happened. No complaints. No issues. Etsitty was a good worker. But, she was trans.
It was brought up more than once how gay and trans people don't need the government to "grant rights" in order for LGBT people to live happy, content lives. Senator Scott McCoy from the Equality side clarified how the government "grants rights" in order to protect people. Civil rights activists didn't ask for legal protections in order to force everyone to love someone based on ethnicity, but in order to not be legally discriminated against. There's a point to government protection. It's not privilege when you're experiencing the oppressed, minority class side of the coin.
On the Sutherland side there was also a woman who's name I can't remember for the life of me. She is a social worker and professor at Brigham Young University who attested that she had read numerous statistics about how "harmful" non-traditional families are; where the children are more prone to "risk".
It's unfortunate to me that, from someone who works with young people and who is employed to help them, she translates that problems children who don't fit the heteronormative mold endure, like experiencing more verbal and physical harassment, the loss of effort and achievement, suicide attempts (which are three times as likely to occur in gay youth than in their heterosexual counterparts) are a byproduct of "the gay lifestyle" and not of homophobia and lacking support in their communities. The worst being the lack of parental support, which I suspect isn't always intentional but, unlike other minority groups, parents of gay or trans children are often not members of the minority to which their children belong.
Anyway, I think the highlight of the evening was a response from Will Carlson in regards to the Sutherland side going on and on about how, statistically,same-sex relations were "more promiscuous", are at a "higher risk for STDs" and "have relationships that generally only last about 1 or 2 years". Carlson replied to Mr. Mero, "You know, lesbians have the lowest disease rate of any relationship. So if that is the goal, only lesbians should be allowed to be intimate!"
This compels me to post a video from a friend's blog. I wonder if all of these families realize that they're just illusions?
Gadz! I was so heated up from this debate that I almost forgot to do my injection! Today was injection day! Woo!
It went well, but this time it was more painful than usual. Generally when I slide the needle in I don't feel it, but this time I had to actually put a substantial amount of pressure on the needle to get it to pierce the flesh of my thigh.
I could then feel it piercing through layers of muscle. I made sure to pull the syringe back a bit to see if any blood oozed in but, when it didn't, I continued to press the needle in and injected the prescribed thick T goop. My leg is still throbbing a bit. I suspect it may be due to the fact that I've been injecting in my right thigh every time, so I'll try switching to my left thigh next time. Then I can hopefully revert to the good ol' slides-in-like-butta days.
*photo courtesy of Salt Lake Tribune
I just read this in the Deseret News.
ReplyDelete"We certainly are not here to change each other's minds about where we stand," said Sutherland President Paul Mero. "The intellectual, legal and moral chasm between the two sides is so great that true common ground is nearly impossible to achieve."
What a mother fucker. Seriously.
Carmen: I was stunned. It's amazing what human minds are capable of turning into seemingly rational justifications for discrimination.
ReplyDeleteHate is rarely rational. I certainly fear the day when it is recognized as such.
ReplyDeleteKammorremae: It won't be. They just misrepresent "statistics" and use words like "sense" and "science" and "rational" as propaganda sound bytes. Iz all just outdated rhetoric that's being blazed over by diversity n' progress.
ReplyDeleteI can't even read this bullshit, not you, but everything about what's happened this week angers me. I want to move away from this state and soon! Boyd originally made this comment and I am stealing it, I wish there was a hell just so these people would end up there. Or even better, that there really was a Jesus so when they died and he showed up he could say, you know you really did get it all wrong.
ReplyDeleteKegg: It's more bewildering than anything. And Paul, the Sutherland president, is correct in saying that we have very different interpretations of reality in a lot of ways.
ReplyDeleteI think that Paul Evensen really hits the hammer on the nail in his "Understanding Homophobia" article:
http://scpronet.com/point/9606/p05.html
Where he states, "Make no mistake, many people believe that fire could literally rain from heaven and destroy us for allowing gays in our midst. Even more people believe they will be held accountable when they get to heaven for not actively opposing gays. So the more deep-seated fear is of a punitive God who will bring retribution if the "gay scourge" is not removed from the land."
It's bewildering madness!
p.s. clarification: Paul MERO is president of the Sutherland Institute. Paul Evensen is someone else entirely!
ReplyDeletegood points and the details are more specific than elsewhere, thanks.
ReplyDelete- Murk