Vote like you have a vagina

Excerpted from a column by Richard J. Rosendall in CAMP Rehoboth:

Gay people, by not conforming to gender norms, are correctly perceived as a threat to male privilege. Let us not pretend that we seek to change nothing of importance. Social and professional standing, the role of women, marriage and the raising of children are all hugely important. The point, as my late colleague Frank Kameny often put it, is that “We are right and they are wrong.“ In our diverse society, people of every gender, color, orientation, faith, and nationality deserve equal treatment under the law. This most American of goals is a threat to some self-professed patriots, and they are fighting back.

Those who oppose us can prevail if they are not sufficiently challenged. Part of the task is about nuts and bolts like organizing and turnout. A big part, though, is one-on-one conversations in which we not only explain ourselves but connect with people on a human level.

The truth will not win out by itself. We must make our case. The religious right has controlled the debate so effectively that too many people don‘t understand that using the civil law to impose one group‘s religious prohibitions on everyone else would be the opposite of religious freedom.

Turnabout being fair play, women legislators in Virginia and Oklahoma have proposed the Every Sperm Is Sacred amendment, in which ejaculation of sperm anywhere but into a woman‘s vagina is an act against an unborn child. (For biblical support, see Genesis 38: 9-10.) Others would require men seeking Viagra to watch videos on the dire consequences of erections lasting more than four hours.

Activist Toni Broaddus recently posted on Facebook, “I have a vagina and I vote.“

I replied, “I intend to vote as if I had a vagina.“

Comments

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here: chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.” The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point: Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo: Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1. Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

Search This Blog