I hate DOMA

Last year I wrote the following as part of the blog post “Why Blacks Hate Gays”

“The freedoms that blacks fought for in the 50’s and 60’s were called “civil rights” but I think they were mislabeled. They should have been called “equal rights”. Blacks were seeking equality not civility. I think what gays are seeking is “civil rights.” Equal rights are for people that are the same who want to be treated the same. Civil rights are people that are different wanting to be treated the same.”

I got some push back from some friends on this, so today I extend this idea lending clarity to very complicated subject matter.

First let me be clear; I believe in liberty. I believe in freedom.  I believe in equal protection under the law. I believe that the large majority of gay people are born gay, through no fault of their own.  However, the birth of a gay child prior to in vitro fertilization in 1978 could only occur through sexual activity between a man and a woman (FACT).  Even today absent adoption, a test tube, or a surrogate, a gay couple cannot produce a straight or gay child (FACT).  If the first cave men were gay we wouldn’t be here today (FACT).

Nature provides parallels for us to examine.  Mules are a hybrid of a horse and a donkey.  Mules can’t reproduce.  A male and female mule can’t create a baby mule.  Mules would become extinct if not for the horse and the donkey.  Gay people would become extinct if not for the combination of man and woman.  Gay people can move society forward through ideas, and innovations but they can’t move it forward genetically in a fundamental organic way. 

Gay people are a derivative of straight people.  They are a hybrid.  They are a deviation.  They deserve the same protections under the law as straight people.  They are not equal because they can’t reproduce themselves (OPINION).

We straight people are stupid because we fought against gays wanting to build lives with their loved ones.  Civil unions made all the sense in the world, and yet we fought against them.  Straight people were so petrified that they created the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in an attempt to thwart gays from encroaching on hallowed ground.  As if marriage can still be considered sacred, when more than 50% of marriages end in divorce. 

I honestly believe gay people in their hearts know that they are different.  If they had been given the opportunity to have civil unions in all 50 states they would have been content with it.  But once straight law makers overreached, gays went for the jugular, because, based in our declaration of independence there is a “pursuit of happiness” idea that trumps divisive behavior and exclusion. 

People that are less than equal need to be protected equally under the law.  As long as civil unions were treated equal to marriage there would have been no need to fight for marriage rights.

Here is where things get uncomfortable. 

Ask any straight father what he secretly worries about concerning an unborn son?  He’ll say that he doesn’t want his son to turn out gay.  Men prefer their sons to be healthy and straight.  They are sad if either one of the two is in question.  Straight fathers wish” straightness” on their sons; In contrast gay fathers don’t wish “gayness” on their sons.  Because they know how hard it is.  They know it’s a burden, and they know it’s not normal.  They won’t wish that difficult life on their child because they love them, and they want the best start in life for them. 

Overreach will always leave you vulnerable.  Civil Rights fill in the grey areas so that people that are not equal get treated fairly.  Equal Rights highlight the unfair treating of equals.  It’s a subtle distinction that means everything.

I hate AIDS Charity

 

A few months back someone very special to me asked me to participate in the “Atlanta AIDS Walk” that she was helping to organize.  I had a visceral reaction to her request.  She read my facial expression as a NO, and said “Well, if you won’t participate, will you donate $100 to us?” To which I hesitated and then replied somewhat dismissively, “Let me think about it.”  Keep in mind that this is her primary charity for which she is very passionate.  A “spirited” conversation ensued.  I won’t share the conversation verbatim but I will let you know what my thoughts yielded.

At the time of the conversation I had no problem with AIDS Charities.  I was never involved in one, but never shunned one either.  I guess I was neutral.  I’d hear about these events and they would just seem so far away, like make believe.  I was never forced to deconstruct them as an idea until my girl put it right in my lap.  As it happens, I was able to achieve clarity, and this is how my thoughts lined up.

Have you ever given blood? If you have, you know that you are asked more questions than your typical Standardized Aptitude Test.  The screening process is rigorous to insure against things like the HIV virus being transmitted through blood transfusions.  The process has become so successful that it’s actually newsworthy when a transfusion transmission occurs. 

I said that to say, in 2014 innocents are no longer directly affected by HIV in America.  Virtually the only way to acquire HIV in 2014 is to share a needle (preventable), engage in unprotected sex (preventable), or be the child of an HIV carrier (unfortunate but preventable).  At Its very core HIV/AIDS in a Sexually Transmitted Disease. Not unlike Herpes, and I don’t see anyone organizing a walk or collecting donations for “the Herps.”

Hyperbole abounds as people call HIV/AIDS an epidemic/pandemic. I guess if one only looked at the totals, how that 75 million people worldwide have been infected; that conclusion would seem apropos.  But can a disease that is 100% preventable be given plague status?   Can we justify the ungodly amount of money that goes into researching a disease that is predicated on poor decision making?  AIDS could be cured in the next 50-75 years if any one of the following suggestions were implemented.

KILL EVERYONE THAT HAS HIV

I know this one is ridiculous, but it highlights the fact that this disease should be thought about differently than real diseases. For instance, if you killed everyone that has cancer would cancer not exist? No.

CASTRATE EVERYONE THAT HAS HIV

Talk about using a sledge hammer on a tack.  This would get the job done but it’s a bit inhumane.

QUARANTINE EVERYONE THAT HAS HIV

Create a town called “AIDS IDAHO” or “AIDS WYOMING” and send all HIV cases there to live.  Effective, but probably encroaches on some civil liberties.

MARK EVERYONE THAT HAS HIV

Tattoo a skull and crossbones right above the genitals so people know exactly what they are getting into.  Hey Now!!! Again, probably a civil liberties issue.

HIV CARRIERS STOP HAVING SEX

Effective, but improbable.

HIV CARRIERS STOP HAVING UNPROTECTED SEX

Easily accomplished, effective, necessary, and unfortunately improbable.

Listen there are a limited amount of resources in the world.  At some point those resources should be prioritized. If you were running an ER and two serious gun-shot wounds came through the door.  One self-inflicted from an attempted suicide; the other a innocent bystander…. All things being equal….. Who would you treat first? Who should you treat first? Who deserves to be treated first?  At some point the phrase “by no fault of his own” needs to carry some weight in this upside down crazy world we live in.