Brandon Hernández 5:09 a.m., June 19
The very important election is over. Obama is the President elect. Ms. Palin can return to Alaska where she can see Russia from her backyard. John McCain gave the best concession speech. It was heart warming to see. Now, let's see what ole "W" has in mind for the next 2 months.
In San Diego, Mike Aguirre was unseated and I hope that is a good thing. BUT, I am very disappointed in California voters. Proposition 8 was really about Human rights. The Pro 8 folks treated it as a marriage law. One man at the rally at Civic Center kept espousing the definition of marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Not sure of his source, probably personal. What the electorate has done is to deny rights to a specific class of persons. Isn't that, in itself, illegal?? Merriam Webster defines marriage:
1 a (1): the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law (2): the state of being united to a person of the same sex in a relationship like that of a traditional marriage b: the mutual relation of married persons
Be sure to read (2). Other references are available either online or at the Library. As to the issue of Civil Rights
Discrimination occurs when the civil rights of an individual are denied or interfered with because of their membership in a particular group or class. Statutes have been enacted to prevent discrimination based on a person's race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitation, national origin, and in some instances sexual preference.
This is from the United Nations General Assembly: entry into force 23 March 1976, in accordance with Article 49
Each State Party to the present Covenant undertakes to respect and to ensure to all individuals within its territory and subject to its jurisdiction the rights recognized in the present Covenant, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
The wise people who govern the State of California passed a law legalizing same sex marriage. This proposition was put on the ballot in opposition to that law. It is wrong. Denying the legal institution of marriage to a specific class of persons is just plain wrong. Let's hope that this is resolved rightly in favor of allowing same sex marriage.
As for those who spout Bible verses alleging that homosexuality is forbidden, my reaction is that I get sick and tired of listening to such "reasoning". If that part of the Bible is absolute, then you must accept that ALL parts are so. Such as, incest (often mentioned in reference to propogate the earth). I have often heard preachers/ministers/clergy speak to the fact that the world has changed. Again, it only changes for specific parts of the Bible. So, in my humble opinion, Bible quoters hold no weight in the argument regarding homosexuality or marriage. In fact, how many are absolute in the doctrine of "til death do us part"? Any divorcees out there?