State of the Union Address

[Jamie McDaniel]

I am writing a letter to the editor of my local newspaper and I encourage everyone to do the same.

Dear Editor,

President Bush began the 2006 State of the Union address by praising Coretta Scott King, an American activist. President Bush described Mrs. King as a “beloved, courageous woman who called America to its founding ideals and carried on a noble dream.”

Later in his speech, the President talked about progress, saying that our country has “become a more hopeful nation.” Then suddenly, without warning, he used the word “activist” as a negative, stating he was discouraged by court decisions that grant gay and lesbian Americans such as myself the right to marry the person we love.

I am saddened that President Bush seems to only understand equality once it has been won -- once the struggle against discrimination is over. Civil rights leaders such as Coretta Scott King, on the other hand, are able to better connect the dots between yesterday's injustice and today's.

Please, Mr. President, hear her words as reported in the March 24, 2004 issue of USA Today: "Gay and lesbian people have families, and their families should have legal protection, whether by marriage or civil union. A constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages is a form of gay bashing, and it would do nothing at all to protect traditional marriages."

Jamie McDaniel
Lexington, KY

Source:
USA Today, March 24, 2004
www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-24-king-marriage_x.htm (http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2004-03-24-king-marriage_x.htm)

[pnggrad79]

The president seems to be like a lot of fundies these days, picking and choosing which part they like and spouting off about it, while leaving out others and saying it isn't important. When I came out to my dad, and mentioned that in the same passage in Leviticus where it talked about men lying with men, that it also forbade eating shellfish, and wearing red, and eating pork. He said that those scriptures were no longer valid, but the one about homosexuality was valid. I was like, "Dad, I saw no line in there dividing what was eternal truth and what was irrelevant in the year 2005" He said that that was just for the Hebrews, and I said, "Exactly! and I ain't Jewish, unless there is something you haven't told me. And, did Jesus and Paul both say that the law showed how much we needed a Savior and that the ONLY two commandments Jesus HIMSELF said were to love our neighbor as ourself and love the Lord our God with all our hearts?" He couldn't answer me. Oh well... I just hope that we don't have a 150 year struggle to go before we are granted our constitutional rights. :o

[schoolboi]

Great letter Jamie!

[tx_gaydemocrat]

That is a wonderful letter!

[Emproph]

I am writing a letter to the editor of my local newspaper and I encourage everyone to do the same.
A timely window of opportunity, good idea Jamie. :)


Then suddenly, without warning, he used the word “activist” as a negative, stating he was discouraged by court decisions
And here I was just coming to terms with not having been offended by everything coming out of his mouth...

I think I just realized something, placing focus on the 'evil activist Judges' allows them to entirely skirt the 'you people don’t count' issue. “I’m not against gay marriage, I’m against activist judges.”
-It would seem even bigotry is becoming politically correct these days. (I think I have my letter)

Oh and pnggrad79, Isn’t the whole "It's no longer valid” thing pretty much the essence of ‘moral relativity?’ And if so, shouldn’t all those who no longer practice Levitican law be out arbitrarily killing everyone in sight because they have no moral compass?