Log in

No account? Create an account
19 February 2004 @ 11:22 am
Bush = intolerance  
uninspired at work again. ho hum. much work to do, none of which is very exciting right now.

in other news. i was in my car this morning when the 8am news came on and there was this bit about how George W. Bush was "absolutely disgusted" by the homosexual marriages that occured in San Francisco over the weekend, and how he was going to draw up some new constitution or something, outlawing gay marriage. i'm sure this is probably old news; i haven't been keeping up too well this week. but it made me "absolutely disgusted" to hear of the blatent narrow-mindedness of the so-called world's superpower's president. what the fuck, are we back in the 1900's again? i've heard a lot of things that have been said, or supposedly said by this guy, that have astounded, shocked, angered me; but this one just plain pisses me off. because what does outlawing a certain group of people, a certain sector of the community, to marry the one they love prove? what does it benefit? what good can possibly come out of such a narrow-minded, intolerant action as this? and it angers me so much because it seems that the president is using his own personal views and opinions to make up rules to govern his entire country by. as if it wasn't bad enough to create a war to settle his own personal agenda with hussein ("he tried to kill my daddy!"); whats he going to do next - make it illegal to follow any other religion than christianity (or whatever his personal choice happens to be) in that country?

it makes me sick. it makes me sick that not only is he so "disgusted" by these marriages, but he is going to actively seek ways to ban this - he is going to spend time, money, energy & everything else, to make sure that 2 women who love each other, or 2 men, can not marry. i don't live in the usa. but those who do, tell me. hows your unemployment rate at the moment? hows your health insurance? your education systems? your welfare systems for disadvantaged families? doesn't seem like your president gives a shit. i'm probably jumping to conclusions here (as i'm so apt to do); but it seems to me that your president is much more interested in setting up roadblocks that meet his own agendas (homophobia being one of them), rather than helping his country - you know, the job he was elected to perform. funny the things that wind up top of the priority list when you're the president. you know, spending billions of dollars on "son of star wars" defence programs and outlawing homosexuals to marry - yeah, thats definitely way more important than making sure every child gets the education they need, or that every person gets the health care they have the right to. silly me, i forgot. good thing i'm not a president.

not everyone agrees if homosexuality is right or wrong, and that's not the issue here. the issue is that Bush is promoting the notion of INTOLERANCE: "if you're not like me & all the majorities, then i'm going to outlaw all the rights you think you're entitled to!" and my question is... WHY? outlawing homosexual marriages doesn't have any functional purpose other than to exercise the president's lack of tolerance for something he personally does not agree with. it should have nothing to do with that. people who use the argument that "marriage should be about reproduction/reproducing" need to look around and see all the heterosexual marriages who are childless by choice and ask themselves if they believe that those sort of marriages should be outlawed too. because really, that's the only thing i can come with as a possibly argument backing up Bush's proposed "constitution". and even that is bullshit. as if the world wasn't over-populated as it is anyway - but that's an issue for another time (and probably for another person to talk about).

hey Bush. why don't you create a law saying that blacks can't marry, or Asians, or people with red hair? because that is as ridiculous as outlawing 2 women or 2 men to marry. what happened to marriage being about love? what happened to the values of acceptance, tolerance - the thing we're taught in first grade?
i'm sure the divorce rate would be a hell of a lot lower for gay marriages than straight ones as well.

so i just don't get it. am i missing something here, am i being too naive and simple about the matter?

oh, and the other thing that gets me is that if this constitution really does go ahead, no doubt australia's very own leader, our prime minister john howard (who makes me want to throw something at the tv everytime i see him on it), will be right behind bush, and trying to impose something similar here.

the whole thing makes me SO ANGRY. why are our governments so fucked up???

and on that note, i'm getting back to work. ho hum.
Full-Pronged Fury!!!!: Dragonangerfork on February 19th, 2004 01:09 am (UTC)
Yeah...a good amount of us feel quite the same way about him as you do!
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 02:55 am (UTC)
hopefully enough to get him out of office!
Annabelledefying_elphaba on February 19th, 2004 01:11 am (UTC)

November can't come fast enough. I just hope I'll be a citizen in time to vote him out.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:06 am (UTC)
i'll be voting in spirit :\
Trilliantrillian42 on February 19th, 2004 01:16 am (UTC)
Have you seen my recent posts on Censuring Bush? 250,000 had called for Congress to censure Bush, in about THREE DAYS after moveon.org suggested it. Yeah, a lot of us agree with you. And no, you're not really making it too simple -- he's making it more of an issue than it possibly needs to be.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:05 am (UTC)
i haven't read, i'm sorry - i've been behind in friends posts all week, but i'll be catching up this week for sure. you're right -- it shouldn't even BE an issue. but it is good that there is so much objection to it.
(no subject) - trillian42 on February 19th, 2004 04:57 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 06:19 am (UTC) (Expand)
Aubreystormvibrations on February 19th, 2004 01:25 am (UTC)
I don't know a lot about what's going on here (which is really, really sad) but I've been really angry about that too. It makes me sad as well, actually. I don't see what the big deal is.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:05 am (UTC)
yeah exactly. it just seems like spite to me. it shouldn't be a big deal at all -- it's not like they're hurting anyone. it pisses me off that he wants to waste time over this, instead of dealing with bigger issues - things that ARE actually hurting people.
(Deleted comment)
Crystalcrystalina on February 19th, 2004 02:15 am (UTC)
it's VERY unfortunate that that wasn't more publicized, because that is disturbing.
Re: - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 02:55 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 02:57 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: - crystalina on February 19th, 2004 03:13 am (UTC) (Expand)
Re: - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:33 am (UTC) (Expand)
Crystalcrystalina on February 19th, 2004 02:14 am (UTC)
unfortunately, this is a popular view in american politics. clinton passed something called the defense of marriage act which declared that marriage is between a man and a woman and that no state is forced to recognize gay marriages which have been performed and sanctioned in another state (this second point was a big deal because with most things the states *do* have to recognize what the other states have sanctioned -- this includes hetero marriage).

i point this out because too many people are starting to think that this kind of disgusting intolerance is a bush thing. unfortunately, it is not. NEITHER of the major parties is fully pro-homosexual (the democrats have certain constituencies to pander to which disagree with homosexuality vehemently). if people continue to think this (and other problems too) is a "bush thing," then they will get too lax when he's not president or, worse, they will push to elect someone who is no better (someone like john kerry).

as far as how are things...unemployment is as low as it was at the end of the clinton years, so that's a good thing. health care is a mess, but bush has actually increased spending on medicare (which is our socialized medicine for all seniore citizens), so he has been working on *part* of that problem.

our education systems are screwed up, but those are mostly run through the states. bush tried to do something to show he was trying to help them, but his plan was very poor and could potentially harm them. HOWEVER, in all fairness, his plan (called no child left behind) has led to increased federal spending through grants for underprivileged (and largely minority) schools. i know this simply because i work for one of the many programs implemented through his educational plan. because of it, the very poor district in one of the nearby towns has well-paid tutors (who are either teachers or students from the university) working in the classroom. now the program sucks, and is just a bunch of unfair tests, but it has led to increased funding from the government.

i've been arguing the homosexual issue with some people on ljchristians (which i'm NOT a member of). many people honestly believe that the law should reflect *their* religious values and should therefore not allow homosexual unions. many of these people are voters. currently, many if not most of the voters in the US believe that homosexuals should not be allowed to have "real" marriages - civil unions, maybe, but not marriage. it's sad and STUPID, but it's a fact.

as far as the constitution thing goes, it pisses me off, but he won't be drafting a new constitution. he wants to make an amendment which says this. i think it's STUPID of course, but i also doubt it will pass the congress, so that's good.

basically i agree: the president needs to worry more about domestic issues. i pointed out some good things because you did ask, but of course things aren't perfect by a long shot. some of those things are state issues, some are simply not within the president's jurisdiction or ability, but some need DEFINITE attention and aren't getting it.

what's stupid is the waste in government. we could afford to make sure no one went hungry or without medical care (without raising taxes), but instead our goverment wastes and wastes money. it's disturbing really.

    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 02:51 am (UTC)
*hugs* thanks for the info Crystal -- i really appreciate that. i have to admit, i didn't take a lot of note of us politics when clinton was president -- well it's really only been in the last year actually; so my views are based on limited information really. and it is encouraging to hear that there ARE some good things going on, as we have a tendency to only notice/concentrate on the bad.

and i totally agree with you about the waste comment.
(no subject) - crystalina on February 19th, 2004 02:56 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:24 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - crystalina on February 19th, 2004 03:29 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:34 am (UTC) (Expand)
drink meroseinyrteeth on February 19th, 2004 03:28 am (UTC)
bush alternately terrifies and disgusts me & i agree so much with what you wrote here, i feel like i don't really have much to say other than nodding my head vehemently. it amazes me how hateful some people can be, to hear him talk about the san francisco weddings this way.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 03:36 am (UTC)
i know. that's all it is really - how else can people justify this type of intolerance? it is frightening, that as a society, we still haven't come much further than what we were 100 years ago. the hatred still runs deep, of anything "different", and it is so so sad.
ko_uta on February 19th, 2004 03:44 am (UTC)
*big sigh*
Yes, unfortunately, while Bush may be a moron (even his own family didn't consider him par), the problem isn't Bush, it's the religious right. They don't undertsand how many rights and privileges they have as married couples (over 1000!!!) that they are denying to anyone who can not have a functional heterosexual marriage. Or, maybe they do and they just want to be asses?
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 06:22 am (UTC)
Re: *big sigh*
heh, i think it's the latter ;)
nah, to be honest to the religious sect, i think a lot of them honestly do believe that what they are doing is RIGHT, and they don't mean it as a vindictive or superior way - "it just is".
but of course, there are always fanatics in every group that give the sect a bad name; people who ARE asses about certain issues, people who believe they are actually superior to others. that pisses me off so much. whats the point in denying others that right anyway? it's not gonna hurt anyone to let them have them. i don't understand, sigh.
blind for the lust; deaf for the feeling.asofterversion on February 19th, 2004 04:55 am (UTC)
I totally agree, and unfortunately, Bush is my president.
linda: weird lightfragilehearted on February 19th, 2004 05:01 am (UTC)
heh, did you read my last entry? it was a sarcastic pro-gay marriage entry.

my favorite idea by far was the last one. it was about how civil unions were supposed to be "separate but equal"...kind of like how blacks used to have to drink out of different water fountains & goto different schools than whites. that stuff seems so absolutely insane when you read about it in history books...yet here it is, happening again, this time w/ the homosexual population.

i don't care who's the democrat running against bush. i'll vote for whoever it is. any person who is disgusted by love is not someone i want in the white house. i know everyone always associates bush w/ texas--but believe me, all texans do NOT think like him! the sad thing is, we have a lot of ppl who are very old-fashioned & holier-than-thou in texas...i guess i'm just kind of used to it, since my father shares this awful opinion (my sister & i used to watch ellen & will&grace just to aggravate him). hopefully enough folks who disagree w/ bush's ideas will head to the polls in november & place their votes w/ the democratic candidate.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 06:18 am (UTC)
i'll have to read yr entry - i'm at work, so can only post & reply to comments thru email, so this weekend will be catchup time.
and yes you're right, it is just like segregation, all over again. i mean, what are the kids learning from all of this? that homosexuality is wrong? way to go making young kids already uncertain of their sexuality feel like shit, basically.

and i associate texas with kelly clarkson ;) hehe.
Jess(ica)wisdumb on February 19th, 2004 06:04 am (UTC)
Most of my opinions have already been expressed by others, but I agree with you. Love should not be based on anything but the fact that two people genuinely love each other, and they should be allowed to get married if they wish.

Sadly, narrow-minded people continue to ruin other people's happiness, but if we persist, like the women did in the early 1900s, like the african americans, asians, native americans, etc did, to get the same rights, I'm sure homosexual & bisexuals will achieve the same rights as heterosexuals, in terms of marriage. Canada is working towards it, as well as other countries. There is hope.
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 06:16 am (UTC)
i hope so. although women, african americans, asians etc don't have *equal* rights compared to their other groups; but that's a whole other issue. it has still come a long way from where it was a century ago; lets hope it doesn't take that long for rights for homosexual couples to progress.
(no subject) - wisdumb on February 19th, 2004 06:53 am (UTC) (Expand)
(no subject) - kisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 10:26 pm (UTC) (Expand)
sleazenationsleazenation on February 19th, 2004 03:35 pm (UTC)

I've been hearing parts of that story recently, although never caught the whole thing.
What on earth is he up to? He claims he is trying to liberate the Iraqi people, to make them free, yet he can't bring himself to allow that same freedom of choice for the people in his own country?
I'm so ashamed of our Mr Blair who is permanently wedged up Bush's ass!
    scarlet's walkkisstheviolets on February 19th, 2004 10:24 pm (UTC)
likewise with our australian prime minister, mr howard :(
Tony: TwoSidesavatar on February 23rd, 2004 11:02 am (UTC)
You know what I found interesting? I haven't seen one negative comment about gay marriages on journals or in chat channels anywhere - people are actively FOR them - and there was a poll on ninemsn.com.au which asked "should gay marriages be legalised?" and there was like ~19000 who said yes and ~35000 that said no!

What the hell is with that?