To Wear My Bra over My Blouse.
Because I have a preference for it. I was born that way. Some say it was environmental influence due to watching too much MTV and VH1 as a youth. Some say it was due to being weaned off breast feeding too early. I have always had this determined fettish to wear my bra over my blouse. The rest of the world be damned if they don't like the exteriorbustiered of us. I am proud to be an Exteriorbustiered! I have started a 501(c)(3), a blog and planned a parade of us proudly exteriorbustiered down Wall Street. I have found a favorite city councilman who actually prefers it as well. I am told he does it himself.
He will propound legislation forcing everyone to like the fact that I and my fellow exteriorbustiered citizens demand our equal rights to not be excluded anywhere for this preferential behavior. We were born that way. It's my constitutional right-I think I will sue Macy's for not having extrabustied models in their Christmas windows.
The above, of course, is laughably fictitious and ridiculous. To some, the gay marriage debate sounds equally absurd.
Practicing GAYNESS, or engaging in Homosexual Sexual Conduct or marrying in committed conjugal gay sexuality is a Behavior. Behavioral attributes do not have the same civil rights standing as immutable characteristics which are considered "suspect classification" like race, gender and national origin.
There are ministries touting various successes getting gay people to not be. They "turn." They have heterosexual fulfiling relationships and families.
Prison populations see statistically higher degrees of homosexual behavior just because the environment. Thus, environment clearly in some cases has a lot to do with it.
In every case it is not evidently irreversible. Some people (not gay people) think it is an abberation, a gene missing, a disease of soul or body, a perversion. Sexuality off the tracks. More religious people call gay behavior "sin." I might like eating Paper or swallowing paperclips but this is considered an eating disorder. (I don't eat these Thank God-I prefer really nasty bacteria ridden unpasturized smelly blue cheese which is not a disorder, at least in France)
I don't think anyone really needs to define it any other way than this:
What you do with your body is a behavior. What your inherent genetic characteristics are is your genetic profile. No one has isolated a "gay gene" have they?
Marriage is conduct. It is a behavior. It does not have the same civil rights standing as immutables.
That would be an easy end there but for the fact that there has been constitutionally considered a "fundamental right of marriage" penumbrally or overtly asserted by the Supreme Court. The issue is for whom is this right "fundamental." Everyone? Anyone? You marrying your rich aunt? You marrying your oedipal mother?
Clearly when the fundamentalness of the right was first exposited it was considered only to apply to men marrying women and visa versa. There is little doubt about the historic context in which this arose. Thus to argue that because the fundamental right exists it should be automatically extended to gays just begs the conclusion as for whom it was intended.
I would argue that there is no fundamental human or civil right for a man to marry a man or for a woman to marry a woman. If these people want to be in love, great. Sexual conduct is another matter all together. It's behavior. Physical intimacy is not a constitutional right. There would have to be a courthouse in every 7-11 if it were.
I say if The Maine taught us anything, it's that it's head-bangingly DUMB to extend the rich civil rights legacy over into the Gay Marriage Equality arena. Dumb politically, dumb strategically, just dumb. It just trivializes the real civil rights struggle and gains. It mocks it almost. Get a better focus and grip.
No comments:
Post a Comment