I can’t really believe I’m bothering to comment on something Chuck Norris said, but I just can’t help myself and it segues nicely into something that’s been bothering me very much.
First a little back story.
According to his entry on Wikipedia (don’t worry, it’s got several legitimate references on what I’m about to mention, check them out for yourself) Mr. Norris has done the following:
- Married Diane Holechek in 1958
- Had his first son, Mike, with Diane in 1963
- Had his first daughter, Dina, not with Diane in 1964
- Had his second son, Eric, with Diane in 1965
- Divorced Diane in 1988
- Married Gena O’Kelley in 1998
- Had twins with Gena in 2001
So what am I getting at, and why is Chuck Norris a giant douche?
Recently Mr. Norris posted a little diatribe to the internet about the recent protests proceeding the passing of Proposition 8.
Now, before I continue I will say one thing. I do agree with him that these protests should not involve violence. Causing physical injury to others or damaging personal property is clearly sending the wrong message. Martin Luther King Jr. understood in the ’60’s that peaceful protest was the best method and so should those continuing the fight for equality today. (Odd that we are still fighting for equality in the US four decades later don’t you think?)
All that said, I’ll get to my point.
Mr. Norris claimed that the protests and rallies occurring in California and around the nation equated to a desire for anarchy. That somehow these hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people that are publicly displaying their outrage for the passing of this hateful legislation are giving up on democracy and calling for anarchy is outrageous. Mr. Norris has clearly never heard of or fully understood the concept of “tyranny of the majority” and would presumably be a-ok with a majority of his fellow citizens taking away just about any of the rights currently bestowed upon him by the US or his states constitution.
Before I cut Chuck Norris out of this I will mention why I felt the need to provide a mini bio on Mr. Norris earlier. Here we have a man that is ok in defending those that proposed and passed a proposition that’s aim was to “protect” marriage. Now he may not have said that he stands behind Proposition 8 exactly, if he did at some point I couldn’t find a reference to that effect, but in defending the actions of those that supported it, and saying to the opponents, tough luck, that’s democracy for yah, he might as well have. If you accept my argument that he’s indeed defending the defense of marriage argument, I have one question. Who is he to be defending those that think they are defending marriage? The guy cheated on his wife between his first and second child, subsequently fathering an illegitimate child, divorced, and later remarried. Marriage is under attack not by those that don’t have the right to marry, but by those that do! That’s enough of Chuck Norris. I promise never to mention his name again.
My Generations Fight for Equality
Californians just wrote into their constitution legislation that flat out takes away rights from a minority. Just to say it again. The majority of human beings in California decided that a minority of other human beings are not worthy of the same rights and privileges that they are. If that doesn’t absolutely disgust you I honestly have no idea what would. Every generation seems to have it’s own fight for equality and this is my generations. Although this time it’s a little different. This fight is being fought on two fronts. On the one hand this fight is to grant rights to a class of people that has truly never had them. On the other hand the fight is against those that are not happy enough with people just not having these rights, they want the rights specifically taken away from them if current laws don’t make it clear enough already. What year is it again?
Bigotry in America? You betcha!
Well, if it isn’t obvious enough yet that I vehemently oppose Propositon 8 and any law that tries to accomplish the same goals, then you haven’t really been paying attention. I supported No on 8 financially as best I could. I couldn’t vote or fly to California to help oppose the proposition physically, so I did what I could. For that matter it seems like others from out of state did what they could to support the proposition. The Mormon Church (Utah), The Knights of Columbus (Global), Focus on the Family (Colorado), and countless individuals. I think it says a lot about the people supporting the proposition and their reasons for supporting it when you realize that these religious organizations, and their followers, were among Proposition 8’s largest donors. I may not be religious myself, in fact it’s this very type of religious bigotry that pushed me away from it all together, but I honestly have no problem with you following whatever religion you’d like. Be that a religion that’s extremely out of touch with the issues facing the world today, you can name just about any main stream religion as far as I’m concerned, or a religion that’s based on the writings of an unsuccessful science fiction writer. Believe what you must to get you through the day.
Do not, however, think that you can take your dogma and force it on me or anyone else that disagrees with you. Define marriage as it pertains to your religion however you’d like. I don’t care if that means only men and women can get “married” in your church or that a man can “marry” however many women he’d like, or that the color of each individuals skin must be the same to “marry.” Make up whatever crazy rules you’d like and “protect” YOUR definition of marriage, whatever that may be. My definition of marriage affords every human being the same rights and I am in no way forcing this definition on your religious beliefs.
These bigots, religious or not, fail to recognize time and time again that marriage at the state/federal level is completely different than at a religious level. Marriage at the state/federal level grants rights that only that level of government has the power to do so. Over 1000 individual rights depending on who’s counting them and how they’re counting them. Marriage at the religious level grants religious rights only. The two are completely independent. If I’d like to get married tomorrow all it takes are a few forms and signatures at the local courthouse, not church. Likewise if I meet the requirements of a certain religion I would have no problem marrying in their church. That marriage in itself does not entitle me to the rights millions of Americans are demanding. In order to be granted those rights I would have to, you guessed it, go to the court house and acquire a marriage license administered by the government. What’s so hard to understand here?
I’m absolutely disgusted that millions of Americans were given the opportunity to vote hate and unequal rights into their own constitution. I’m even more disgusted that some chose to use that opportunity to force their bigoted views upon millions of others that merely want to be treated as equals.
I’m sure I could go on, and I might in a later post, but for now I’m done.