Saturday, July 9, 2011
UP-DATED: "Let the People Vote"? Really?!
Recently, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) has unveiled a new site called Let the People Vote; it's first call to action is to launch a state-wide protest in three of New York's largest cities on the day that Gay couples are allowed to receive their Civil Marriage Licenses from the state. (This, on what should be the the happiest day of a Gay couple's life! Real classy, NOM!) So far as I am aware - not being a resident of New York - none of NOM's protests are being held outside of each city's Court House while Gay couples are walking in and out with their licenses (instead, they are supposedly targeting the four Republicans who "betrayed" their constituents). A smart move on their behalf! After all, we remember how racists in the south - even mothers of children - picketed integrated schools after the Supreme Court ruled against segregation. Often, according to reports, these women (and citizens in general) would spit at and say viscous things to these children as they walked to their new school. (Ref.: "The Halting and Fitful Battle for Integration" in Life, Sep. 17, 1956: pp. 34-41). However, the meaning is clearly apposite to that intended by early segregationists - NOM is still attempting to protest the Civil Marriage Licenses of Gay couples as seemingly "fraudulent" in accord with their personal Theofascist religious views.
Below is one photo of sign-carrying protesters in support of segregation; notice the central sign being held aloft: "We want Equal - but segregation"!
This is a direct parallel to one of Maggie Gallagher's infamous talking points, "It's not discrimination to treat different things differently" (not that I in any way endorse the evangelical Christian Broadcasting Network...they merely provided a handy transcript of an infamous episode of The Dr. Phil Show featuring Maggie Gallagher), or NOM's early talking point (which they still laud as highly as that sign), "Gays and Lesbians have a right to live as they choose, they don't have the right to re-define marriage for all of us!" I certainly believe that segregationists would likely have held apposite political views insisting that social change were now being thrust upon them! Now, notice a second sign from the same time-period also criticizing integration:
A few of them read, "Segregation was planned long before the Supreme Court justices were born". This probably means (and the racist Council of Conservative Citizens [CCC] would certainly agree with these sentiments) that segregation was seemingly divinely-ordained to these Southern folk from the 1950s. But, again, we have observed apposite signs, slogans, and sentiments from so-called "traditional marriage" supporters (Hetero-Hegemonists) that cannot be ignored in this "debate".