08 January 2011

Something that has bothered me this week...

Well, it's time for my resolution-fulfillment post for the week. Those of you who actually stop by Fuzzy Theologic probably noticed the template change. Yes it's Blogger-standard, but I like it and the space needed sprucing up a bit.

On to what's bothering me. Most of you are (or now are) aware that I consider myself a tripod conservative. The legs of this tripod are fiscal, social, and national defense. This does not mean that I agree with Homeland Insecurity's policies, or the current crop of Republicans' definition of fiscal conservatism, and most certainly not all social policies. Does this make me a bad conservative? I don't think so. In fact (boosting my own ego here) I believe this defines me as the ideal conservative.

Here's what's got me going on this tangent: this week in Charlotte, NC a local city councilman by the name of Bill James (R) went on our local talk radio station (News/Talk 1110am WBT) and expressed his view that homosexuals are sexual predators. His logic went something like this:

Men who have sex with little boys = sexual predators :: Men who have sex with little boys = homosexual :: Homosexuals = sexual predators

Now, any rational human being will automatically see the flaw in this logic. Namely that grouping all homosexuals in the sexual predator category is not only asinine, but just damnably ignorant and irresponsible. Especially coming from the mouth of an elected official. However this is par for the course for Mr. James. A few years back he referred to predominantly black residential neighborhoods in Charlotte as "moral sewers". You would think that stuff like this would get a man ousted from office, but oh no, not in Charlotte, no sir. He was re-elected after that little faux-pas. As much as the movers and shakers in this town would like to think that this city is as cosmopolitan as New York, it's crap like this that keep "Dueling Banjos" playing in people's heads whenever Charlotte is mentioned in conversation.

My take as a tripod conservative is this: while the science for homosexuality is still inconclusive (i.e. genetic v. conscious decision) it is a factor in our culture and society. Sexual preference is protected by the same laws that guard against discrimination of other forms; be that race, religion, age, or gender. This falls under the category of protecting individual liberty, something that all who would call themselves conservative should hold as part of their guiding philosophy. This is not to say that you have to like it, make friends with every gay person you meet on the street, or even be tolerant of it. It does mean that if you hold the belief that homosexuality is a sin, or a disease, or whatever; keep it to yourself, discuss it with like-minded groups of people, or rally against it with said like-minded individuals, you have a Constitutional right that protects that.

But for the love all that is reasonable don't go running for (and winning) a political office spouting off crap like this. Not only does it color people's perception of the area you represent, it also affects the larger group you choose to be affiliated with.

In short, an elected conservative should only be concerned with keeping the budget balanced, through that keeping social policies in check, and by further extension keeping the citizenry safe. Beyond that, your opinion on other matters is irrelevant.

As to arguing against Mr. James' position, what's to debate? My family and myself have people we work with and some we consider friends who to varying degrees of disclosure are gay. Pardon my descent into vulgarity, but they aren't trying to fuck me or my wife, and they aren't trying to rape my children. Could there be some individual out in the wider world that would? It's very likely. But as to brazenly calling people I choose to associate with sexual predators? I have but two words for you: Fuck You.

In closing, I know I go around saying the cliche "I don't discriminate. I hate everybody." I say this to get a weak laugh from those around me, but this is not completely accurate. I only hate stupidity, which Einstein accurately pointed out is infinite when it comes to humans. Bill James (regardless of how much education he may have) is stupid.

I feel better now. I'll feel even better if and when Mr. James is ever removed from office.


Karl Joe said...

The logic Mr James uses is known in math as the transitive property...if a=b, and b=c, then a=c.
For example, if God is Love, and Love is Blind, it could be argued that Ray Charles is God. On another note, sexual orientation is NOT guaranteed or protected by the Constitution...if it was, gay marriage would be legal across the board, no questions asked. It could technically fall under the "life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness" thing, but that's open to interpretation...I like the rant, though.

The Pueschel said...

Ahh, but note that I said "same laws" not Constitutional guarantee. Sexual orientation is very much protected by federal anti-discrimination laws. My reference to the Constitution was only related to the protection of free expression, however idiotic it may be. I double checked to make sure.