Tag Archives: sexual orientation
If the truth is told, I have to confess to being somewhat of a moderate. I lean to the left, hard to the left some would say, but many of my positions are decidedly more moderate than far left. On social issues, I am decidedly liberal, as if it is a “liberal” position to consider equal rights for all and “giving” women the right to decide their own medical decisions.
I believe in giving folks a hand up, not just a hand out. Most definitely a hand out is warranted at times, but it is my belief that most folks would just as soon have an opportunity to make a place for themselves and their families in this life. I believe in the intent of the Second Amendment, a pro-gun position, but I also believe in strong laws to punish those that use a gun in the act of committing a crime. I am against the Death Penalty but I believe in life without parole for those convicted of heinous crimes. I believe in fiscal responsibility but embrace Keynesian economics. I believe in low taxes, but only when they make economic sense. I believe in war, but only when it is in the (true) national interest of the United States.
So why am I “accused,” sometimes in vile terms, of being a far left socialist that is anti-American?
The positions that I have noted should be mainstream, not positions that are vilified as somehow being “fringe or radical.” Recently, I read on another blog that moderates, or independents, are cowardly and ill-informed. Eh? Somewhere, I got the “radical” idea that we are to educate ourselves on the issues and make an informed decision for ourselves. In 2010, apparently it is not enough to label liberals as evil, but moderates fall into that category as well.
The pendulum always swings right when the left is in control politically, and visa versa. This election season the pendulum is not swinging right, it seems to be stuck on far right. The Tea Baggers are purging RINO’s while attempting to win state-wide general elections without moderates and independents.
There is certainly something strange tainting the waters these days.
William Stephenson Clark
Well, I have been told, “Thank’s, but no thank’s!” That’s all good – I never push it too far, but, so far, this has never happened to me:
“When grasped by a male they do not want to have sex with, female cane toads will inflate their bodies so rival males can dislodge the unwanted suitor.”
So, what is it about men and women and sex?
Sex is one of God’s greatest gifts to mankind. I often say that “sex” is a little taste of Heaven so that we stay on the right track.
But why is there so much focus on sex? We are all human (well, except me) so sex comes naturally to most of us. We are attracted to the opposite sex (or the same sex) and we pursue sexual encounters. We buy flowers, candy, dinners and movies, all in pursuit of that “moment.”
Our airways and media are filled with sex. Movies, television, music, advertisements, magazines, bathroom stalls are all dedicated to the pursuit of sex.
In my not so humble opinion, there is no such thing as “bad sex,” so long as it is consensual among adults. “Doin’ it” is as natural as breathing. In fact, many would just as soon “do it” as breath.
So, why the goofy, puritanical views of sex in America?
Americans are fascinated by “who is doin’ whom.” At the same time, we are quick to condemn “who” for “doin’ whom.” What sort of hypocrisy leads us to condemn while secretly (or not so secretly) playing the numbers game?
Tiger? Bad boy. Bill? Dumbass. Wilt? Serial exaggerator.
George Clooney? Yeah! What a stud!
Come on! We can’t celebrate the bachelor without celebrating the bachelorette. If “he” is a stud, how is it that “she” is a slut?
It’s just “sex” boys and girls – or boys and boys or girls and girls.
Ease back on the hypocrisy and celebrate it for what it is.
William Stephenson Clark
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times…”
“A Tale of Two Cities” – the opening line – Charles Dickens – 1859
Two wars. A fired commanding General. An economy that is stubbornly refusing to recover fast enough. A massive oil spill that threatens our Gulf. Illegal immigration. No progress on Gay Rights to speak of. Conflicts in the Middle East. Tin-pot dictators run amok. Global financial crisis. Congress in perpetual gridlock. Fred Phelps and the Phelp Tone-Deaf’s. Drug wars in Jamaica and Mexico. Global freakin’ warming. Sandra and Jesse back on speaking terms.
Are these the worst of times?
Absolutely not. Yes, the world has more than it’s fair share of problems right about now, but these are far from the worst of times. It is human nature to look at today and be dissatisfied. It is also human nature to look at yesterday with a certain fondness for times that “were better.”
I wrote a column published yesterday with that very topic.
No, despite the troubles of the world, we have a bright future. We may not get there soon, but it is there. Collectively, we need to move beyond pessimism and consider the optimistic signs that point the way to a “best of times” scenario.
The wars that we are engaged in will end. We will recover from the global financial crisis. The oil gushing in the Gulf will be stopped and we will find away to clean up the mess. The tin-pot dictators will die off and be replaced by slightly more sane alternatives. The slow progress of Gay Rights will accelerate as the more bigoted generation dies off. The illegal immigration problem will continue, but better solutions will come to the fore. Fred will die. Eventually, a saner approach to drugs will be adopted. And Jesse will screw up again and America’s Sweetheart will be back on the market.
Progress has been made, abet slowly. A historic, but flawed, Health Care bill has been passed. Medical science has moved to the point now that living to one hundred will be commonplace. The world will grow tired of perpetual conflicts in the Middle East and the white-hot hatred will cool. The world will change for the better.
The best of times – maybe not in our lifetimes – but they are coming.
William Stephenson Clark
The suggestion that someone is gay is usually taken as a direct accusation of homosexuality. Only being gay is not automatically a disqualification for office anymore. Indeed, many places have laws prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation, and there are an increasing number of gay and lesbian officeholders at all levels of elected government. So why do we still think it’s bad to call someone a lesbian? Linda Hirshman, who admits to knowing nothing about the sexual orientation of Kagan, wraps up her interesting op-ed piece by saying:
Finally, and here’s a real dirty little secret, President Obama appointing an openly gay candidate for the Supreme Court would be political genius. Think about the prospect of watching the married Senator Ensign—who is under investigation for allegedly seeking lobbying work for the husband of his mistress—arguing that the high court nominee is “sinful” or “lacking in personal morality,” as the Focus on the Family suggests. The polls are clear: Regardless of their views on same sex marriage, most Americans do not think gays and lesbians should be discriminated against, and the numbers for gays on all issues are sky high among young voters. The Republicans don’t want to be caught in a Pat Buchanan-style culture war just as the mid-term elections loom, just like enough of them wanted to avoid the anti-Hispanic trap to confirm Justice Sotomayor. It’s a no-lose nomination.
There is nothing wrong with being gay (or lesbian). What hurts is the assumption that it hurts.
The University of Pennsylvania last week became the first school to announce that it will provide a spot on its application for students to indicate their sexual orientation. Is this a good idea? There seem to be some obvious objections—for example, hyper-competitive students will simply lie about their sexual orientations if they think it will give them an edge. But Gabriel Arana raises some more interesting points at the American Prospect: “Students who are out in high school live in communities that are more tolerant. Statistically, these communities are more educated, less religious, wealthier, and whiter. Having grown up in a conservative, largely Hispanic community on the U.S.-Mexico border, I would not have felt comfortable identifying as gay on college applications. So if the intention is to recruit gay students, the effect will be felt only by the subset of gay applicants who, at 18, feel comfortable identifying as such. It really becomes a proxy for other demographic attributes that on the whole are largely indicative of privilege.” Furthermore, Arana points out that elite schools like Penn already have large and active LGBT communities—in general, they don’t face the same problems in attracting gay students than they do with students of racial minorities.
Today is National Coming Out Day, an internationally-observed civil awareness day for coming out and discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) issues.
So many people are open about their sexuality now, that equal rights under the law is at the forefront of the modern LGBT movement. Same-gender marriage is now recognized by several countries – Canada, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway, and South Africa. Civil unions and domestic partnerships are recognized in 17 countries, including the United Kingdom, France, and Germany, just to name a few. Unions are also recognized in some parts of Mexico, Australia, and Venezuela, and other countries.
On yet another issue, America is behind the curve!