Once more, the Religious Right is claiming that we are out to turn every straight kid into a flaming faggot. It is all part of our evil plan to switch all those sweet innocent kids from doing God’s work of procreating the human race, into flamers.  Over in California, the proponents of DENYING GAYS EQUAL RIGHTS is now claiming that somehow by allowing same sex marriage, kindergarten age children will become indoctrinated into the Gay Lifestyle.

“If the gay marriage ruling is not overturned, teachers will be required to teach young children there is no difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage,” according to Prop. 8 supporters, whose ballot arguments became public this week as part of a display at the secretary of state’s office. (source)

To begin with, what is the difference between two men or two woman joining together in Marriage?

Let’s be honest, if two people care enough for each other to want to spend the rest of their earthly life together, what difference does it make if they are the same gender? Then too, if marriage is supposed to be solely about the PROCREATION of mankind, then why can infertile couples become married? Surely if it is based on that requirement same gender marriage wouldn’t fit, but then a large number of heterosexual marriages wouldn’t either.

This isn’t about some secret agenda to get a new crop of gays, for when we get older. After all, what happens when they grow up? It is such a stupid argument, that it should make one laugh, and yet so many seem to buy into the bullshit. Simple truth is that marriage is not just about making babies. It is about a bond between two souls, something the Religious Right should know about.

There isn’t any camps out there where kids as young as 5 are being indoctrinated into Queerness, but there are Bible Camps, where little children are taught to believe with all their might into something they have no concept or perception about. Not much different than similar camps run by fundamentalist Islamists. Yet that is okay, that type of brainwashing is accepted, but granting two men/women the right to share their lives with each other is somehow Indoctrination?

To stand up and say that there is ONE LAW FOR ALL, is somehow about a secret Gay Agenda? About brainwashing kids into becoming Gay? Someone needs to properly toilet train these idiots, because for starters, there is no secret agenda. Secondly, you can’t make someone Gay, either they are born feeling attracted to their own gender, or they aren’t. It is not like a Gay person can change how they feel, so what makes the Religious Right think we can change their little offspring?

Nor is this about God either. This is simply, about HATE.

A recent poll shows a sharp rise in the number of people who believe that Openly Gay People should be allowed to serve in the US Military. The Poll cites many changes in the results, for the so called perception of Gays, or the Homosexual LIfestyle, that includes whether openly gay teachers should be allowed. And it appears, according to the poll, that it is across the political spectrum, from Republicans, Democrats, and Independents.

Today, Americans have become more supportive of allowing openly gay men and women to serve in the armed forces. Support from Republicans has doubled over the past 15 years, from 32 to 64 percent. More than eight in 10 Democrats and more than three-quarters of independents now support the idea, as did nearly two-thirds of self-described conservatives. (source - MSNBC News)

On the surface, it does seem like things are improving, but if this is the case, why is Being Gay or Supporting Gay Rights still a major political weapon for the Republicans? I mean if this poll is true, why is DADT still in effect?

Why is the Mathew Shepard Act still in limbo, under threat of a Veto, if so many are more accepting of Gays?

Perhaps the issue isn’t that the Polls are right, or wrong, but that we place way too much emphasis on them, without even knowing just what is being asked. After all, how you ask something can determine the response, so is it that Americans are being more accepting of Homosexuality, or is it the question is misleading, creating an erroneous answer? Or are people answering the way they are, because they PERCEIVE that is how they should answer?

Proof is in the actions, and frankly, it seems that while they may SAY they are more understanding, more accepting, the actions say otherwise.

The US Senate has passed a Foreign Relations Aid Package, that increases the amount of money available for AIDS/HIV treatment in Africa. In fact they have basically TRIPLED the amount, and expect it will not be sidetracked by either the House of Representatives or the White House. This new package throws $50 Billion towards African Countries, for treatment of Malaria, TB, and AIDS.  With $41 Billion being designated for AIDS/HIV treatment.

The 80-16 vote committed the United States to spending up to $48 billion over the next five years for the most ambitious foreign public health program ever launched by the United States. (source - MSNBC News)

$2 Billion of the funds allocated are going to a domestic program, for Native Health, Water, & Law Enforcement programs.

See, this bugs me, because I think too many ‘add ons‘ are what derails most of the legislation before Congress. Now don’t get me wrong, I am not objecting to the funds being allocated, simply that why is it tacked onto another bill, that is basically Foreign Aid?

So when the Republicans campaign this fall, will they tout how the Democratic Congress has over spent on Foreign Aid, citing this $50 Billion Bill? If so, will they clearly note that $2 Billion is for Domestic Policies? Or will they claim that they encouraged the spending domestically to help Natives by listing the Fifty Billion Dollar Bill or the Two Billion?

Will the Voter remember that this bill isn’t just about AIDS/HIV spending as well?

I just don’t understand why a specific issue should become part of something else. Like why is Native Health, Water, & Law Enforcement programs being added onto the Foreign Aid Package? Is it that they wouldn’t pass it? I mean it is like the Mathew Shepard Act, that has passed but hasn’t been made Law, because it keeps being tacked onto other bills, that get VETOED or it gets withdrawn so the other bill WON’T GET VETOED.

If a bill fails, then the Voter knows the reason. It is either because one or the other parties failed to support it, and that is important to note. It shouldn’t be that Republicans fail to support a bill like say the War Spending Bill, that had the Mathew Shepard Bill attached, but are able to claim that it isn’t they are against protecting Queers, just that they weren’t about to let the Democrats conduct the War in Iraq.

It is a fair argument to make, though we all know that isn’t the case. So why do both sides insist on adding stuff to bills, that simply aren’t related?