When this story came out last week about Christian clergy from around the state coming out (HA!) in support of the marriage amendment, I was going to blog about it. But of course I didn't get around to it. I've left the tab open for days, because I intended to write about it. Obviously, the Catholic Church is against it. The concerted effort the Church is making in Minnesota was what finally led me to stop going to Mass. (I'd only been going for weddings/funerals/holidays for years.)
Now, I've read former Viking Matt Birk's opinion piece, also supporting the amendment, and I'm just so goddamn angry, I've got to get it out. It won't make me feel better (I'm already in tears), but the rage has to go somewhere.
It just fucking kills me that people like Birk and Archbishop John Nienstedt say things like, "This is a positive affirmation, not intended to be hurtful or discriminatory to anyone," (Niendstedt) or "A defense of marriage is not meant as an offense to any person or group," (Birk).
How do you reconcile that in your head? How can you say you don't intend to discriminate when you're urging people TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF DISCRIMINATION? How do you think people should feel when you say, "No offense, but I think you shouldn't have the same rights as other American citizens"?
How do you say, Matt Birk, "All people should be afforded their inalienable American freedoms," in the same article where you're saying gays don't deserve to have the same rights as other Americans? I would think the cognitive dissonance would be hard to deal with for a guy as smart as yourself.
When I read shit like this, I feel like I'm losing my goddamn mind. You can't say you're not a homophobe, not a bigot, if you want to deny an entire class of your fellow American citizens the same rights you're afforded. You are a bigot. You are a homophobe. You intend to discriminate, offend and be hurtful.
Denying people equal rights hurtful and offensive. It's wrong. It's discrimination. And it has no place in the Minnesota Constitution.