jaysays.com |

because simon isn’t cool anymore.
Subscribe

A Little Perspective for the National Organization for Marriage

July 19, 2010 By: jaysays Category: Featured, Thought of the Gay

In a recent video put out by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), an organization devoted to preventing equal protections for certain citizens of the United States, a woman with tears in her eyes tells the story of how she was bullied and intimidated by LGBT rights activists during the hate fest.  What was the crime?  The protesters blocked her view with their signs!  Here’s the video:

This isn’t the first time NOM has played the victim card. Throughout their campaign to prevent same-sex couples from having hospital visitation rights, paying equal taxes, enjoying the same retirement benefits and generally pursuing their own happiness, NOM representatives have attempted to paint the LGBT community as oppressive radicals who are out to destroy America. Now it’s time for a little perspective:

These are the faces of our dead.  These are the faces that anti-lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender sentiment said it was ok to harass, beat and even kill.  On average, over four LGBT people are victimized by a hate crime each day.  Hetersoexuals are victims of sexual orienation bias crimes at a significantly reduced 0.01 per day.  In fact, there has not been a single reported case of an LGBT person murdering a hetersexual person simply because they are heterosexual.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again here, it’s time for NOM to come down off their cross – someone else might want to use it.

Be Sociable, Share!

1 Comments to “A Little Perspective for the National Organization for Marriage”


  1. I want to preface this rant with a disclaimer: I am usually the last person to bring up race in anything. I don't believe in giving privilege nor punishment to someone for something they can't help. Getting lucky in the genetic dice-throw is not an achievement that you get kudos for.

    That said, I noticed that Maria's children are different colours. She has two dark children and one light one. I'm assuming the man behind her was the husband she refers to. I'm curious as to if this is husband number two, or if the first two children were born out of wedlock. Traditional family, Maria? No, no, no. That marriage would have been illegal a scant 43 years ago. If she was married to the father of the first two children, is he dead? He'd have to be for her second marriage to be traditionally acceptable. Divorce (especially for the religious) was frowned upon and/or illegal in the US without the showing of fault until 1970 in CA and later in other states. Did they plead irreconcilable differences? Tough sh*t, my grandparents hate each other and they've been married for almost 50 years, cause it's the traditional thing to do. Were these kids born out of wedlock? Up until not very long ago, they'd have a big, fat "illegitimate" stamped on their birth certificate. They could be denied jobs, loans, and security clearances just because of the way they were born.

    In conclusion, I hope Maria and her NON-traditional family appreciates the radical activists who got rid of anti-miscegenation laws, fault-based divorces, and the discrimination against illegitimate children.

    1


Leave a Reply