I watched an interesting battle between politicians, name-calling religious zealots, pro-gay liberal progressives, and lawyers recently as the Danville, Kentucky City Commission discussed and ultimately passed the so-called “Fairness Ordinance” with a vote of 4-1 on Monday.
The alleged “pro-fairness” politicians bowed down to a local organization, Sunrise Children’s Services, and exempted them and similar religious groups from the law that is steadfast for the rest of the citizens. But, you know, money talks and when it’s going to cost to vote your beliefs, most politicians alter the language of their beliefs.They settle. It’s sad. Cowards. If it’s not fair for everyone, it’s not really fair, is it?
The Mayor Said No
There was one member of the Commission — and only one — who stood up for their convictions without compromise, without saying “it’s not what I want, but it’s something which is better than nothing.” That person was Mayor Bernie Hunstad and I applaud him.
He represented the “silent majority” in this county who still believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. Now, I’m not a terribly religious woman. I have my private beliefs (and they will remain private), but I applaud him for representing that majority of his (and this commission’s) constituents and giving them a carefully considered and well-spoken voice in the proceedings, without hesitation and without flim-flam.
It was also a nice change from the teenagers who had appeared at earlier meetings, not so much to express their own views as to call their oppostion in the LGBT community names and spread hate instead of defending their own position.
You Can’t Legislate Change
I do not see the “Fairness Ordinance” as fair. I see it as another instance of government control creep (although it’s more of a gallop these days), and a tool to use for litigious types which will waste more time and money — both of which are provided by local taxpayers.
You can’t legislate change. If you could, places like Chicago would never have any gun-related violence. Yeah, right. That law is working out so well for them, isn’t it? (A well-armed society is a polite society, IMHO).You can’t legislate fairness either.
The views and challenges and triumphs of the LGBT community have been highly publicized in mainstream media and even in our public schools, in elementary school sex education classes — which I find horribly inappropriate and distasteful. (The usurping of the rights of parents to teach their children as they will about personal issues — such as sex — is criminal, IMHO, not “wonderfully progressive.”)
I Can See Both Sides
I want my son (who happens to be gay) to be happy, I believe he deserves the opportunity to pursue happiness and to have a life filled with the liberty and freedom to do so. I do not believe that he and his significant other (an individual I find delightful) should be denied the social benefits of couplehood when it comes to such things as insurance, taxes, and death benefits.
(Of course, I have issue with government involvement in all of these areas as well, but if the government is allowed to be involved, then it should treat all people the same, right?)
I support civil union in these cases, I believe that “marriage” per se is a religious covenant between a man and a woman. I do not believe it is the role — or the right — of the government to dictate anything about religious ceremonies. Period.
In short, I believe that government should stay out of private lives and quit trying to legislate, tax, and dictate what we do in our homes, in our families, in our places of worship, and in our own thoughts.
Valuable Individuals Create New Things – They Don’t Steal and Alter the Existing
I am a writer. I have never believed in changing the definitions of existing words or works of literature because in modern light they are deemed to be less than politically correct. They represent a point in time and should remain unblemished, unchanged, a true representation of their time, the author, and the topic(s).
If you don’t like the word or the work, then get off your butt and come up with one that you find more suitable. Don’t alter Huck Finn (as was recently done) because you don’t like what it says. Instead, use that creative energy, that dissatisfaction, to create or promote another work that does carry your message.
This commission should have either abandoned the “Fairness Ordinance” or passed it. It should not have been altered to exempt the ONLY local example — in all of the discussion I heard — that actually WAS discriminating against someone in the LGBT community. In essence, those of us who do NOT discriminate are now more likely to have to deal with bogus legal claims that we ARE discriminating, while those who openly refuse to hire gays are given a pass. What crap!
Drama, Drama, Drama
I watched with great interest as this local fairness ordinance drama unfolded. I watched the politicians get hung up on the title “Fairness” without applying it to the whole. I mean, seriously, how can you pass something called a “fairness” ordinance and have it contain exemptions?!?! That’s simply ludicrous.
Other than Mayor Hunstad, I found, for the most part, that the pro-fairness side was better educated and smoother in their presentation than those who were against it — until the ordinance passed. At that point, the ugly side of the “fairness” supporters came out to dance around and flail about…
And the Award for Dramatic Performance Goes To…
The wife of one of our esteemed commissioners (bless his heart) gets that award.
In response to the Mayor’s comments and referenced articles from a conservative (*gasp! how dare he!!*) group, she decided his statements and his attempt to bring the view of many of his constituents into the commissioner’s chambers were “outrageous, inappropriate, offensive and served no positive purpose to our city.”
She’s right. Unless an elected representative wants to consider and give voice to the views of the many conservative, religious members of this small town. Unless he wants to defend the classic definition of marriage in America. Unless he feels obligated to provide a well-versed and reasonable counter stance. Unless he believes in dialog before consensus. Unless the Mayor wants to be (dare I say it…) FAIR during the process of governance.
But she didn’t stop there, no she continued her shenanigans to reveal her true motives, “To that end, I request that you tender your resignation, for the benefit of our community.” WHAT? For the benefit of the community he represents? The community that elected him? The community that continues to support him because he will not bow down to this bogus brand of liberal bullying? I think not!
Then she said something that was simply nonsensical., “I cannot believe that you said what you said, to have such an exclusive group to be privileged, to have so few freedoms. I am appalled. I am shaking.” Was she talking about the Mayor’s reference to marriage? That marital exclusive group? If she is, then she’s right about them having so few freedoms these days, and that the actions of people like herself are further eroding them.
Or, in her statement “to have such an exclusive group to be so privileged” — is she talking LGBT now, or is she talking about the commission, or politicians, or citizens, or someone/something else.I don’t know… It’s so hard to tell. You see, that’s what happens when you can’t back up your points with any examples, facts, or even proper nouns. Sad, but true.
And is she appalled at her lack of ability to have a point — a specific gripe? I sure was. And is she shaking because she’s just realized that everything she’s said is hateful and spiteful, but has no real focus or meaning? (Probably).
But she doesn’t stop there, oh no… she continues with, “I’m not just saying this, I mean it… I will start working to put together a petition to ask for your resignation”. I’m assuming he should resign because he’s conservative? Because he dared to represent the beliefs of many of his constituents? Hmmmm… yeah, that’s what politicians are supposed to do. I’m pretty sure that they are supposed to…
She concludes with “That was so embarrassing, I can’t even begin to get over it.” Oh I agree. I feel sorry for her. Heck, I’ve never met her, but I feel embarrassed for her and by her.