Am I really supposed to believe that this country is somehow in danger, thanks to a "radical social agenda?" That's the sort of rhetoric people like Tony Perkins are using now that a federal judge has ruled that "Don't Ask, don't Tell" is unconstitutional. I don't know about you, but I find nothing "radical" about ensuring that all citizens of this country are guaranteed the same rights. Unless your definition of radical includes things like the 14th Amendment, instituted by those crazy socialists in 1868 (and some have discussed repealing this amendment, but that's a whole different story).
Let's take a look at that 14th Amendment. It's section 1 that concerns the issue here:
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside. No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."
So tell me...how are gay people not citizens of the United States? And how does the institutionalized discrimination of policies such as DADT not constitute making or enforcing a law that abridges their "privileges or immunities"? Granted, this doesn't involve individual states making the laws, but I can't believe this amendment is intended to imply that the federal government can discriminate in such a manner while the states cannot.
This seems pretty cut-and-dry to me. We've come a long way as a nation regarding civil rights and equality. Let's take some more steps forward, shall we?
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

No comments:
Post a Comment