In an effort to avoid any future discussions about this, I've attempted to compile all my thoughts on the subject in this post. Maybe it's arrogant of me to think that a single blog post could effectively address every point of this issue, but I've given it my best shot.
Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label gay marriage. Show all posts
Thursday, March 28, 2013
Wednesday, May 09, 2012
Just shouting at deaf ears
Have you read this yet? Here's the gist:
(CNN) -- A gay teenager who pulled a stun gun on students he said bullied him has been expelled from his Indianapolis high school until January.
I was about to share this on Facebook, thinking the story could stand some more attention, but... fuck it. One more snarky comment from me isn't going to suddenly make things better. Now, I had a whole angry rant here about how public schools are full of shit, but that's really not the point I hope to make, so in the interest of being informative rather than just blowing off steam, I'm going to scale it back a little. So, let me just get a few thoughts about this specific story out first, and then we'll get to the heart of the matter.
The environment in our schools molds our children, and their low standards of education and care are clearly setting up our entire country to fail, but hey, who has the time and resources to solve that problem, right? Better to just make an example of the kid with the taser so they can keep up appearances without actually making their schools any safer.
"The district does not condone bullying," she said. "Students who violate the rights of others through bullying behaviors are held accountable."
Really? I wonder, how many bullies have been expelled? My guess is few or none. Seems like disproportionate punishment to me. Oh, but the student with the weapon has to be expelled, because obviously that weapon was making students feel unsafe in their school. By that logic, the bullies should've been expelled as well, but hey, that makes too much sense.
By the way, what kind of spokesperson actually has to say "we do not condone bullying"? I never once suspected they did, until they said that. Nobody (publicly) condones the practice of bullying, so when you make a point of saying that you don't condone it, it's overcompensating. I actually suspect worse things about this school because they went out of their way to say that.
Students take part in anti-bullying programs from kindergarten through 12th grade, district spokeswoman Mary Louise Bewley said. The district also offers Gay Straight Alliance groups on multiple campuses, including Arsenal Technical High School, where Young attended, Bewley said.
Yeah? How well is that working out for you? A gay student brought a taser to school because, in his own words, "I wasn't safe." Tell me, if a student is being pushed around and physically threatened by other students, what does your little alliance group do about that? How did this situation escalate so far before the school stepped in?
Look, it doesn't take a brilliant person to see the problem here. These punishments are clearly reactive in nature, not proactive. They claim they have anti-bullying programs, but have these programs improved the social atmosphere in schools? Obviously not. I don't know, maybe if kids respected your staff at all, they'd listen to what they had to say in these programs, but my guess is they don't.
Okay, ready? Heart of the matter time:
You know what would go a long way toward ending bullying in schools? Showing the kids, through our actions, that judging somebody because they're different is completely unacceptable and utterly un-American.
How do we do that? Well, off the top of my head... Legalize gay marriage. Stop cultivating a culture where gays are considered aberrant and a danger to our way of life. When prejudice and hatred dictate policy in our government, it teaches our kids far more than any cheap public school workshop will.
Kids bully because we've taught them to do so; we show them that's how the world works. Look at our politics; look at our wars; look at our reality tv; look at cable news. We've taught them that aggression, drama and violence are the tools for success. Are we really this fucking stupid?
Well, for once, I'm going to call on you, the person reading my frustrated diatribe, to take action. Even if you don't share this actual post, share the idea. Make other people connect the dots. We can't publicly say we're against bullying while our actions send the opposite message. Actions speak louder than words; we've all heard this. Isn't it high time we lived that creed? Shouldn't we practice what we preach? Or are we going to continue letting fear, misinformation and hatred tear our culture apart?
Stop telling our kids how to act and then wondering what went wrong. Be a fucking role model.
That's all I needed to say for now. Peace and love, all you happy people.
(CNN) -- A gay teenager who pulled a stun gun on students he said bullied him has been expelled from his Indianapolis high school until January.
"While the district does
not condone bullying, it also does not allow weapons to be brought on
our school campuses for any reason," a spokeswoman for Indianapolis
Public Schools said Tuesday. "Students who violate this rule will be
held accountable."
I was about to share this on Facebook, thinking the story could stand some more attention, but... fuck it. One more snarky comment from me isn't going to suddenly make things better. Now, I had a whole angry rant here about how public schools are full of shit, but that's really not the point I hope to make, so in the interest of being informative rather than just blowing off steam, I'm going to scale it back a little. So, let me just get a few thoughts about this specific story out first, and then we'll get to the heart of the matter.
The environment in our schools molds our children, and their low standards of education and care are clearly setting up our entire country to fail, but hey, who has the time and resources to solve that problem, right? Better to just make an example of the kid with the taser so they can keep up appearances without actually making their schools any safer.
"The district does not condone bullying," she said. "Students who violate the rights of others through bullying behaviors are held accountable."
Really? I wonder, how many bullies have been expelled? My guess is few or none. Seems like disproportionate punishment to me. Oh, but the student with the weapon has to be expelled, because obviously that weapon was making students feel unsafe in their school. By that logic, the bullies should've been expelled as well, but hey, that makes too much sense.
By the way, what kind of spokesperson actually has to say "we do not condone bullying"? I never once suspected they did, until they said that. Nobody (publicly) condones the practice of bullying, so when you make a point of saying that you don't condone it, it's overcompensating. I actually suspect worse things about this school because they went out of their way to say that.
Students take part in anti-bullying programs from kindergarten through 12th grade, district spokeswoman Mary Louise Bewley said. The district also offers Gay Straight Alliance groups on multiple campuses, including Arsenal Technical High School, where Young attended, Bewley said.
Yeah? How well is that working out for you? A gay student brought a taser to school because, in his own words, "I wasn't safe." Tell me, if a student is being pushed around and physically threatened by other students, what does your little alliance group do about that? How did this situation escalate so far before the school stepped in?
Look, it doesn't take a brilliant person to see the problem here. These punishments are clearly reactive in nature, not proactive. They claim they have anti-bullying programs, but have these programs improved the social atmosphere in schools? Obviously not. I don't know, maybe if kids respected your staff at all, they'd listen to what they had to say in these programs, but my guess is they don't.
Okay, ready? Heart of the matter time:
You know what would go a long way toward ending bullying in schools? Showing the kids, through our actions, that judging somebody because they're different is completely unacceptable and utterly un-American.
How do we do that? Well, off the top of my head... Legalize gay marriage. Stop cultivating a culture where gays are considered aberrant and a danger to our way of life. When prejudice and hatred dictate policy in our government, it teaches our kids far more than any cheap public school workshop will.
Kids bully because we've taught them to do so; we show them that's how the world works. Look at our politics; look at our wars; look at our reality tv; look at cable news. We've taught them that aggression, drama and violence are the tools for success. Are we really this fucking stupid?
Well, for once, I'm going to call on you, the person reading my frustrated diatribe, to take action. Even if you don't share this actual post, share the idea. Make other people connect the dots. We can't publicly say we're against bullying while our actions send the opposite message. Actions speak louder than words; we've all heard this. Isn't it high time we lived that creed? Shouldn't we practice what we preach? Or are we going to continue letting fear, misinformation and hatred tear our culture apart?
Stop telling our kids how to act and then wondering what went wrong. Be a fucking role model.
That's all I needed to say for now. Peace and love, all you happy people.
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Gay Marriage - My 20¢
I don't know how many of you watch the Daily Show, but there was just a very compelling interview between John and Mike Huckabee. I wasn't aware of this before, but apparently Huckabee's against gay marriage (or if you prefer, in favor of protecting the sanctity of marriage). At any rate, the interview (which ended up being just shy of 20 minutes) got me thinking, and I decided I'd weigh in on the issue myself. (You might want to hit the restroom and grab something to eat, because this could take awhile)
Now, Mike Huckabee's argument, although flawed in my opinion, is grounded in sound logic. He's in favor of preserving the values that he and many Americans hold dear. By itself, this is certainly a reasonable position, and probably one I would hold myself if not for my affliction of the mind which causes me to think about everything from every possible angle. I'm not saying Huckabee's wrong, but that he's right about the wrong thing. Still with me? Cool.
The thing is, Huckabee's position basically says to me that he's not seeing the forest for the trees. Or the trees for the forest they make up. Whatever. The point is, by standing behind his values, the sanctity of marriage and by extension the family unit, he has inadvertently placed himself in direct conflict with another sacred value: the belief that all men are created equal. Again, I don't think less of him for it any more than would for a person who's for gay marriage, as they have thus abandoned the traditional definition of marriage.
The bottom line is, this issue is complex and difficult because it places two of our society's core values at odds. Sadly, this is one of those times when we can't have our cake and eat it too. A decision has to be made, and in my opinion, banning gay marriage is the wrong one.
It's a matter of priorities to me. Human freedoms in my mind are more important than protecting our age-old concept of marriage. Marriage is a great institution, but compared to our freedoms, it's just not worth defending anymore. For starters, marriage as an institution isn't as set in stone as people would like to think. As Stewart mentioned, there were times in human history when polygamy was the accepted norm. In the dark ages and beyond, marriage was more concerned with creating an economic agreement between two wealthy families than it was with the wishes of the two people being married. It was a simple means to an end, not a sacred union.
Then there is the simple fact that marriage's "sanctity" has been under attack for centuries already, and faced no opposition until now. People can get married in Vegas without getting out of their car. Is that sacred? People get married all the time to fuse their assets, or in the case of immigrants, they get married so they gain the right to stay in the country. Is that really sacred? And don't forget, a good 40-something percent of marriages end in divorce, often resulting in the family's finances being strained, their children emotionally scarred, and their overall bond as a family left all but dissolved. Is that really sacred?
I'm sorry, but the argument that marriage needs defending is akin to the argument that we should make greater efforts to save the Dodo from extinction. Marriage isn't sacred. It may be a nice symbol of the love two people for each other, and is a great step forward in their life together, but sacred? I'll allow that there may be individual marriages that are sacred, but taking the institution as a whole, accounting for its long and seemingly self-contradictory history, I have to say that marriage in general is not sacred.
Therefore, with the institution of marriage being a sadly un-sacred affair, it seems to me that the value we should be defending is the one that each and every one of us still holds sacred today: the notion that we are all equals, both in the eyes of God and the eyes of the law. There may yet be an argument that can prove humanity is not sacred, but I have yet to encounter it, and will firmly stand my ground as a member of the human race until I do.
Now, Mike Huckabee's argument, although flawed in my opinion, is grounded in sound logic. He's in favor of preserving the values that he and many Americans hold dear. By itself, this is certainly a reasonable position, and probably one I would hold myself if not for my affliction of the mind which causes me to think about everything from every possible angle. I'm not saying Huckabee's wrong, but that he's right about the wrong thing. Still with me? Cool.
The thing is, Huckabee's position basically says to me that he's not seeing the forest for the trees. Or the trees for the forest they make up. Whatever. The point is, by standing behind his values, the sanctity of marriage and by extension the family unit, he has inadvertently placed himself in direct conflict with another sacred value: the belief that all men are created equal. Again, I don't think less of him for it any more than would for a person who's for gay marriage, as they have thus abandoned the traditional definition of marriage.
The bottom line is, this issue is complex and difficult because it places two of our society's core values at odds. Sadly, this is one of those times when we can't have our cake and eat it too. A decision has to be made, and in my opinion, banning gay marriage is the wrong one.
It's a matter of priorities to me. Human freedoms in my mind are more important than protecting our age-old concept of marriage. Marriage is a great institution, but compared to our freedoms, it's just not worth defending anymore. For starters, marriage as an institution isn't as set in stone as people would like to think. As Stewart mentioned, there were times in human history when polygamy was the accepted norm. In the dark ages and beyond, marriage was more concerned with creating an economic agreement between two wealthy families than it was with the wishes of the two people being married. It was a simple means to an end, not a sacred union.
Then there is the simple fact that marriage's "sanctity" has been under attack for centuries already, and faced no opposition until now. People can get married in Vegas without getting out of their car. Is that sacred? People get married all the time to fuse their assets, or in the case of immigrants, they get married so they gain the right to stay in the country. Is that really sacred? And don't forget, a good 40-something percent of marriages end in divorce, often resulting in the family's finances being strained, their children emotionally scarred, and their overall bond as a family left all but dissolved. Is that really sacred?
I'm sorry, but the argument that marriage needs defending is akin to the argument that we should make greater efforts to save the Dodo from extinction. Marriage isn't sacred. It may be a nice symbol of the love two people for each other, and is a great step forward in their life together, but sacred? I'll allow that there may be individual marriages that are sacred, but taking the institution as a whole, accounting for its long and seemingly self-contradictory history, I have to say that marriage in general is not sacred.
Therefore, with the institution of marriage being a sadly un-sacred affair, it seems to me that the value we should be defending is the one that each and every one of us still holds sacred today: the notion that we are all equals, both in the eyes of God and the eyes of the law. There may yet be an argument that can prove humanity is not sacred, but I have yet to encounter it, and will firmly stand my ground as a member of the human race until I do.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)