![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Okay, I know I pissed someone off with this today, but I feel like I need to make something clear so I avoid it in the future.
Life is not fair, and I do not feel anyone is entitled to it being so. Most people who are reading this have been fortunate that through force of arms or force of law, we have been given many privileges and freedoms. But that does not mean that those rights did not have to be earned by someone, be it Colonial Soldiers 200 years ago, the NAACP/SCLC/SNCC, U.S. troops, or international laws and conventions based on English Common Law and the solicitors and barristers who worked to form them.
There is no such thing as a right to anything. Human beings are 'entitled' to exactly one thing: death. If you have been given the gift of life and your mother chose to bring you to term, you will eventually get a free death at some point, regardless of who you are and what you have or have not done. Everything else is going to be earned through hard work.
In some cases, people will help you. (In many cases, in fact.) But that does not mean we can claim that we deserve things, that we should be given things, or that we have a right to things and automatically expect to recieve. All too often you're going to have to fight for it, and you're going to have to fight hard.
Does this mean we should give up searching for things like equality, fair treatment, or various benefits and comforts? Absolutely not. They are good things to have, and in many cases our society could stand to be a bit more permissive, a bit more ecumenical. A level playing field is not a bad thing. But it is not easy, it often doesn't happen, and if a lot of the things people currently agitate for happen in my lifetime, I will be surprised.
I don't want you to feel I don't care. I do. But the above is who I am, and I tend to apply that to a lot of things that you and I will probably disagree about frequently, and if that pisses you off, I really am sorry. I don't like pissing my friends off. But it's gonna happen now and then.
Life is not fair, and I do not feel anyone is entitled to it being so. Most people who are reading this have been fortunate that through force of arms or force of law, we have been given many privileges and freedoms. But that does not mean that those rights did not have to be earned by someone, be it Colonial Soldiers 200 years ago, the NAACP/SCLC/SNCC, U.S. troops, or international laws and conventions based on English Common Law and the solicitors and barristers who worked to form them.
There is no such thing as a right to anything. Human beings are 'entitled' to exactly one thing: death. If you have been given the gift of life and your mother chose to bring you to term, you will eventually get a free death at some point, regardless of who you are and what you have or have not done. Everything else is going to be earned through hard work.
In some cases, people will help you. (In many cases, in fact.) But that does not mean we can claim that we deserve things, that we should be given things, or that we have a right to things and automatically expect to recieve. All too often you're going to have to fight for it, and you're going to have to fight hard.
Does this mean we should give up searching for things like equality, fair treatment, or various benefits and comforts? Absolutely not. They are good things to have, and in many cases our society could stand to be a bit more permissive, a bit more ecumenical. A level playing field is not a bad thing. But it is not easy, it often doesn't happen, and if a lot of the things people currently agitate for happen in my lifetime, I will be surprised.
I don't want you to feel I don't care. I do. But the above is who I am, and I tend to apply that to a lot of things that you and I will probably disagree about frequently, and if that pisses you off, I really am sorry. I don't like pissing my friends off. But it's gonna happen now and then.
no subject
First of all, both sides are valid. You are 100% right that the majority of the time, you have to fight for many things. There are some things that, given the sacrifices of others before our time, are guaranteed to us because of one thing or another. I think what others are trying to say, is that in terms of marriage, they feel that ALL unions should be recognized. Now, because the law does not recognize same-sex marriages, there will undowbtedly be fighting going on, both to secure the right, and to take the right away. Is this difficult time for homosexual unions fair, hell no. But nothing in life ever changes automatically. And frequently, life isn't fair, gay, straight, black, white, or other.
Change can be gradual, happening over many years, or it can be quick. Because of the justice system in this country, change in the laws regarding marriage will most certainly be a slow process. I have read many articles discussing a female same-sex couple, the Goodriches, who have a daughter and have lived together for many years. These two have been fighting for many years for the necessary amendments to marry. In fact, when their daughter asked them why they weren't married, they had the necessary blood tests done, and went with their money to the court house to try and get a marriage license. They were told, "I'm sorry, but before I can issue the license I need two grooms". Did they give up, no. Because those who truly want the rights will fight for them to the bitter end.
Sometimes just one person can make that change. A young African-American man, who worked for a upscale company in Cincinnati, was not only the one black man employed by the company, but he was the only employee who was not allowed to eat in the segregated lunchroom. All he did, nonviolently, was simply go to the lunchroom each day until he persuaded the managers to allow him to eat. And they did. It took many months, and many days of eating at the bench outside the lunchroom, but he did it. He wanted to be on equal footing with his co-workers in every respect, and he earned that right. Not that he shouldn't have had it to begin with, but he understood that change takes time and that he was working against a system centuries old.
The same goes for homosexuals. Its not fair that they don't have equal rights across the board. It sucks, and it should be different. For me, I am two sides of the issue. The first, that homosexuals should have the same rights and that it shouldn't even be an issue. The second, that no one ever got anywhere without fighting. For someone like myself who HATES confrontation, this is a frightening prospect. But from reading your entries and everyone's comments, both sides present equal and honest points of view on the matter. There is no one right answer.
There will always be discrimination towards one group or another. Does that make discrimination right, no. Can you change it, if you really want to.
no subject
In other words, I don't care one way or another. I'm not gay, so this all doesn't really relate to me. If they want it, give it to 'em, I says.
In the meantime, feel free to join me in my corner. I have both cherry and apple pie.
no subject
I don't know if this idea comes from a poor understanding of political science or a need to rely on an unquestionable figure of authority, or (the most likely, IMHO) if it is simply a reaction to the perceived 'unfairness' in the natural world... The point is, though, that the social world is -not- the natural world, and as much as you might like to deny the fact, we -are- guaranteed certain rights socially by the very social contract that we are born into. To deny that is to deny the very basis of our democracy.
Re:
How can a right to pursue happiness possibly be guaranteed or enforced? How can a right to fair representation for the citizen be maintained in an age where corporations and lobbies carry far more weight than nearly any single voter?
How is a right to free speech or freedom of religion upheld when we have things like 'Free Speech Zones' and FBI/Homeland security tracking persons due to their ethnic or religious backgrounds as potential threats to national security?
I won't deny the basis of democracy, but I would argue that it is not an effective one, for the most part. The social contract exists, but it does not function as you insist it should, to my mind.
Re:
no subject
Personally, I think it's more and more a statement of why a revolution might be neccesary.
no subject
Re:
Re:
Always been the big problem with social contract theory.
Re:
Re:
And should I find someone to share my life with me, I would fight for the same fair legal treatment of the marriage as anyone else. Because government is too big to ignore.
no subject