Posts Tagged ‘Proposition 8’

Story HERE

DC Councilman Marion Crackbarry

Barry, D.C.’s former crack-smoking mayor, (the ‘former’ referring to the job title, not necessarily the crack-smoking part) is back in the news.

Councilman CrackBarry was the only person on the D.C. City Council to vote against a bill that would legalize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere.

In the Washington Post Barry is quoted as follows:

“All hell is going to break lose.  We may have a civil war. The black community is just adamant against this.”

Although Barry personally has long supported Gay rights, he has claimed his recent vote against the bill reflected the views of his Southeast Washington constituency.

“What you’ve got to understand is 98 percent of my constituents are black and we don’t have but a handful of openly gay residents,” Barry said. “Secondly, at least 70 percent of those who express themselves to me about this are opposed to anything dealing with this issue. The ministers think it is a sin, and I have to be sensitive to that…”

Take it for what it is…a crackhead’s opinion.  Yes, in pure numbers it’s fair to say that the majority of African-Americans may not be in agreement with gay marriage, but it is unfair to broad stroke allege that the whole of the community is adamant against it.  It’s simply untrue.

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.MrMoKelly.com.  Mo’Kelly can be reached at Mo@MrMoKelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

Carrie Prejean

UPDATE 6.22.09 – Perez Hilton PUNCHED OUT (Allegedly) – Click HERE

UPDATE: 6.10.09 – Carrie Prejean FIRED!  See story HERE.

___________________________

After the initial Perez Hilton and Carrie Prejean story broke, I had a casual conversation with my friend Dave about the strategy and political implications of Hilton’s actions and what might be the ripple effects.  Dave and I attended high school together and Dave is openly gay.

We mused about the level of importance of Hilton’s remarks during and subsequent to the Miss USA pageant.  I had already written a scathing editorial, alleging that Hilton’s actions indicated that he wasn’t “ready” for gay marriage in America.  His intolerance of opposing viewpoints was little different than the intolerance for gay marriage.

Dave was terse and to the point.  Not only did he argue that the fight for the “title” of marriage was misguided, he also alleged that the fight over “the title” would galvanize the Christian conservative right-wing.  Going further, the actions of Hilton would likely ensure that Miss California USA Carrie Prejean would end up being recruited to help lead the anti-gay marriage movement.

Then, the other shoe dropped.

Thursday, Prejean released a statement and became the “unofficial” spokesperson for the anti-gay-marriage group National Organization for Marriage.

Right on time.  Score two for Dave.

Not only did Hilton’s actions further galvanize the Christian right, they turned Prejean into an anti-gay marriage

Perez Hilton

“American Idol” of sorts.  That can’t be good for the gay marriage movement, no matter how one attempts to spin it.

The question now is, what exactly was accomplished by the public grandstanding by Perez Hilton as a “judge” during the Miss USA pageant?  There are those who would argue that when given such a platform, you must use and even abuse it.  But such methodology ignores strategy.  Carrie Prejean is no longer an insignificant runner-up beauty contestant…she’s now a figure-head for a movement.

That can’t be good for the gay marriage movement, no matter how one attempts to spin it.

If the gay marriage movement should have learned anything from the Proposition 8 fight in California, it’s that the anti-gay marriage movement was both organized and well-funded in its efforts to disseminate its message.  Why further help it out?  Only respecting those who agree with your viewpoint is not respect at all.  It’s discrimination in its most insidious form.

If the gay marriage movement should have learned anything from the African-American civil rights movement, it’s that the opposition isn’t browbeaten into submission, it must be won over.  For all the Dr. Martin Luther King quotes posted on Perez Hilton’s website, in his attempt to connect to the African-American civil rights movement, he curiously misses the most salient point.  Being “right” isn’t 1/10th as important as being righteous in one’s actions.  The distance between “right” and “righteousness” is the distance between failure and success in winning over the hearts and minds of those who may oppose you.  The essence of Dr. King’s philosophy can be gleaned from this singular quote on the strategy of non-violence.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Another thing that we had to get over was the fact that the nonviolent resister does not seek to humiliate or defeat the opponent but to win his friendship and understanding. This was always a cry that we had to set before people that our aim is not to defeat the white community, not to humiliate the white community, but to win the friendship of all of the persons who had perpetrated this system in the past. The end of violence or the aftermath of violence is bitterness. The aftermath of nonviolence is reconciliation and the creation of a beloved community.”

Perez Hilton sought only to humiliate Carrie Prejean with his ill-advised “dumb bitch” and “cunt” oratory.  To King’s point, Perez as a recognized voice in the gay community neither won any friends nor increased any understanding.  He did though increase bitterness, divisiveness and ultimately solidified the opposition to gay marriage.  He ensured a more-organized and more-focused anti-gay marriage campaign.

Mission not accomplished.

If Carrie Prejean was a “dumb bitch” when Hilton queried her…what does it mean now that she’s a “dumb bitch” with a verifiable voting constituency?  What have Hilton and the gay marriage movement gained?

Correct.  More organized opposition, that is what was gained.

BREAKING NEWS:  (Case in Point): Proposition 8 Upheld in California – CLICK HERE:

But back to Dave…

The continuing evolution of the Carrie Prejean phenomenon has proven my friend and classmate Dave right.  She went from relative obscurity to a household name.  In fact, I couldn’t even tell you by name who actually WON the Miss USA pageant if my life depended on it if you quizzed me.  But I CAN tell you who is the “unofficial” spokeswoman for the National Organization of Marriage without a crib sheet.

As they say, don’t tug on Superman’s cape.

So back to the question about the “rights” to the “title” of marriage issue.  I understand the argument that legalized marriage is more than just about the “title,” it’s about inheritance, child-custody and the public and equitable acknowledgment of a romantic union.  Intellectually, I, Mo’Kelly, understand that.  But I, Mo’Kelly also understand that the premise of the end justifying the means.  If the “end” is equal rights…which is separate and distinct from “equal title,” then why would Hilton consciously throw a brick through the window of the opposition?  Cutting off one’s nose to spite their face applies here.  How many moderate and undecided voters swung to the side of opposition due to Hilton’s behavior?

Jackie Robinson

The Dodgers’ Jackie Robinson was both right and righteous in his actions.  Baseball was subsequently compelled to change for the better because of it.  The  The Little Rock 9 who entered Central High School in Arkansas were both right and righteous in their actions.  The integration of public education could not have happened without it.  They were already “right,” even before they stepped foot in Central High School thanks to the ’54 Supreme Court decision of Brown V. Board of Education. They were “righteous” in the manner in which they took their strides one year later.

Right vs. righteousness.  It is not simply enough to be “right,” progressive change requires righteousness.

King also went on to say…

“The aftermath of nonviolence is reconciliation and the creation of a beloved community. A boycott is never an end within itself. It is merely a means to awaken a sense of shame within the oppressor but the end is reconciliation, the end is redemption.”

What sense of “shame” has Hilton awakened or inspired in the hearts of those opposed to the gay marriage movement?  What attempt at reconciliation has Hilton made?  Where is the beloved community in the wake of Hilton’s behavior and castigation of Prejean as a “dumb bitch?” It is not enough to simply quote Dr. King to argue the moral imperative of justice, one’s actions must also retain the moral high ground in the process.

And just FYI, it’s HIGHLY offensive to appropriate Dr. King and the Civil Rights movement, yet also disrespect African-Americans who intellectually disagree with you.  To do so flies directly in the face of everything Dr. King stood for.  It’s not enough to “quote” Dr. King and cherry-pick text.  You actually have to be sincere and in concert with what King believed.

Hilton has simply set his movement back many years for the sake of self-aggrandizement.  That’s not the fault of the heterosexual majority, the blame should be laid at the feet of Hilton for his stupidity which trumpets the very insensitivity he allegedly seeks to eradicate.  The movement for gay marriage is not better off or furthered  because Perez Hilton used and abused Carrie Prejean before a national audience.  Hilton only ensured that the fight will be even more arduous and the opposition will have a face and focal point in which to rally behind going forward.

Not smart.

Hilton’s page views are up and his search engine optimization is at an all-time high.  But what has the gay marriage movement gained?  Correct, absolutely nothing.  But don’t blame the new “unofficial” national anti-gay marriage spokeswoman Carrie Prejean, blame Perez Hilton who willingly created her.

RELATED: Perez Hilton is Unready for Gay Marriage in America

Why Proposition 8 is Right and Why Ultimately It’s Wrong

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.MrMoKelly.com.  Mo’Kelly can be reached at Mo@MrMoKelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

http://twitter.com/mrmokelly

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

Perez Hilton

UPDATE 6.22.09 – Perez Hilton punched out…allegedly.  Click HERE.

___________

Just in case you haven’t heard about the controversy, blogger and now celebrity “judge” Perez Hilton used his “platform” as Miss USA judge to ask finalist Carrie Prejean, Miss California USA her views on gay marriage.  To which, Carrie spoke openly and honestly.

Yes, a gay rights activist asks you about your views on gay marriage with a scorecard in hand…an impossible situation.  Not surprisingly, Prejean ended up as first runner-up, likely due to the subsequent markdown by Hilton.  Hilton discusses the controversy and his later reference to Prejean as a “bitch” on his blog in video below.

Yes, Perez Hilton in response to Carrie Prejean’s answer in the Miss USA pageant, has called Prejean a “bitch” on his blog perezhilton.com

In short form, Hilton has once again proven what has been historically wrong and misguided about the gay marriage movement. Such has been the paradox of the gay marriage discussion.

In any discussion of “rights, freedoms and liberties” there must be freedom and the right to disagree.  Judging by Hilton’s behavior, if you don’t agree with gay marriage, you’re a “bitch”..or worse a “cunt” (his words).

Nothing like arguing for a more progressive nation by falling back on sexist terminology to disrespect those who disagree with you. Such behavior was not unlike what transpired here in California when gay marriage proponents verbally assaulted many African-Americans with “nigger” to express their displeasure with African-Americans voting in support of Proposition 8.

Yes, calling women “bitches” and Black people “nigger” to help advance one’s “civil rights” agenda.  Great strategy there.  If that doesn’t win over the hearts and minds of people, nothing will.

But speaking of us “Black people.”

Mo’Kelly doesn’t “agree” with right-wing race arsonist Pat Buchanan on anything fundamental to African-Americans, but Mo’Kelly more importantly understands that there is a place for people like Buchanan in America…BECAUSE it is America.

Carrie Prejean is not a “bitch” because she disagrees with gay marriage.  It means it’s not for her and such beliefs are consistent with the definition of freedom and equality in America.  There are some people believe it or not who are just fine with being heterosexual.  It doesn’t a priori mean s/he is a bigot or is “anti-gay.”  There are some gay people who disagree with Affirmative Action, and Mo’Kelly is smart enough to know, that doesn’t make them “anti-Black” either.  We should be able to differentiate and discern between the two; disagree without being disagreeable in the process.

Prejean has created no law to abridge the rights of any ethnic or sexual preference group and she’s done nothing to personally embarrass the Miss USA pageant as “some” have alleged.

She simply answered the question put before her.

She was asked for her honest opinion and she gave it.  She was not supposed to be evaluated on the basis of whether we found her to be “progressive enough” or “politically correct enough.”  Supposedly, her answer was to be judged on the merits of how thoroughly and well-constructed her answer ultimately was.

Guess not.

It’s a beauty pageant, not a political debate.  The only person who was unclear was Perez Hilton.

If Rev. Al Sharpton asked a racially charged question to Prejean and she answered the question in the same manner, staying true to her beliefs; Mo’Kelly would feel the same way.  She answered the question that was put before her, from a gay-rights activist blogger with an agenda.  The only person who should be ashamed was the person who asked the question under those circumstances.

It was a beauty pageant stage, not a political one to advance one’s personal platform.

What Hilton fails to understand and refuses to acknowledge is that marriage by definition is a religious ceremony, meaning it has religious overtones and connotations for many people.  If you should ask an Islamic man for his religious views and you don’t agree with Islam’s treatment of women, it’s both the man’s right to worship as he chooses and our right to disagree and even dislike those beliefs.  Freedom is a dialogue, not a monologue by those who may try to shout down all opposing viewpoints.

“Tolerance” is a two-way street.

Parallel:

There are plenty people in this country who believe in and support polygamy.  There are a number of religions which observe and encourage polygamy in this the 21st century.  Conversely,  polygamy is not a legal right.  Americans are “free” to worship as they choose, but we still are a society of laws which supersede some worship practices.

Polygamy has been outlawed by most societies, but there are schisms of Mormonism and Hinduism for example which hold it in high regard.

To the point…

What is irrefutable is that marriage is de facto a ceremony, a union borne of religious tradition, and is not a legal right in and of itself in any varying form we may see fit.  If it were, polygamy would be equally viable as a marriage union.  One can’t argue that a man has a “right” to marry a man, and ALSO argue a man doesn’t have the “right” to marry two women. Where does one draw the line…if at all?

Meaning…

Either there is a strict definition of marriage or there is NO definition of marriage at all.  One can’t have it both ways.  Draw the line somewhere or not at all.  Presently Mo’Kelly can’t legally “marry” two women simultaneously.  Is that discrimination?

Of course not.

In the end, Prejean should not be disrespected and ridiculed (openly or privately) because she does not agree with same-sex marriage.  Freedom of speech intimates dialogue, so those who disagree with her should engage her in dialogue not perverse disrespect.  Perez Hilton’s behavior has only ensured the widening of the gulf between gay marriage supporters and opponents.

He had ample opportunity to at the minimum engage her and the larger public in the debate about same-sex marriage in these subsequent moments.  He instead continued on his low-road, opting for “bitch” and “cunt” references.

How “enlightened” and “progressive” of him…

Yes, “persuasive arguments” they are…no doubt.  If someone didn’t agree with gay marriage before the Miss USA pageant, surely the chants of “bitch” and “cunt” will change their minds…

In addition, the longer people like Perez Hilton continue to help widen this gulf, the longer it will take for the genuine and widespread acceptance of same-sex marriage…assuming that’s Hilton’s goal.  Maybe Mo’Kelly and others have given him too much credit.  Acceptance can not be brow-beaten into being.

Respect is always earned…never demanded.

If the gay marriage movement wants to take anything away from the African-American civil rights movement, take that.

If Perez Hilton desires respect, acceptance and reverence for gay rights, gay marriage and gay people in general, the first prerequisite is to conduct oneself in a way demonstrative and consistent with respect and acceptance.  Until that time comes, he’s free to keep spinning his wheels and reinforcing all of the negative stereotypes promulgated in regards to same-sex marriage proponents.  Perez Hilton is obviously in no way ready for gay marriage in America.  And if he isn’t…he has no business trying to lecture anybody else on why we should be.

RELATED:

Blame Perez Hilton for Carrie Prejean Phenomenon

Why Prop 8 is Right…and Why it’s Ultimately Wrong

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.mrmokelly.com.  Mo’Kelly can be reached at Mo@mrmokelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

Perez Hilton

UPDATE 6.22.09 – Perez Hilton punched out…allegedly.  Click HERE.

___________

Just in case you haven’t heard about the controversy, blogger and now celebrity “judge” Perez Hilton used his “platform” as Miss USA judge to ask finalist Carrie Prejean, Miss California USA her views on gay marriage.  To which, Carrie spoke openly and honestly.

Yes, a gay rights activist asks you about your views on gay marriage with a scorecard in hand…an impossible situation.  Not surprisingly, Prejean ended up as first runner-up, likely due to the subsequent markdown by Hilton.  Hilton discusses the controversy and his later reference to Prejean as a “bitch” on his blog in video below.

Yes, Perez Hilton in response to Carrie Prejean’s answer in the Miss USA pageant, has called Prejean a “bitch” on his blog perezhilton.com

In short form, Hilton has once again proven what has been historically wrong and misguided about the gay marriage movement. Such has been the paradox of the gay marriage discussion.

In any discussion of “rights, freedoms and liberties” there must be freedom and the right to disagree.  Judging by Hilton’s behavior, if you don’t agree with gay marriage, you’re a “bitch”..or worse a “cunt” (his words).

Nothing like arguing for a more progressive nation by falling back on sexist terminology to disrespect those who disagree with you. Such behavior was not unlike what transpired here in California when gay marriage proponents verbally assaulted many African-Americans with “nigger” to express their displeasure with African-Americans voting in support of Proposition 8.

Yes, calling women “bitches” and Black people “nigger” to help advance one’s “civil rights” agenda.  Great strategy there.  If that doesn’t win over the hearts and minds of people, nothing will.

But speaking of us “Black people.”

Mo’Kelly doesn’t “agree” with right-wing race arsonist Pat Buchanan on anything fundamental to African-Americans, but Mo’Kelly more importantly understands that there is a place for people like Buchanan in America…BECAUSE it is America.

Carrie Prejean is not a “bitch” because she disagrees with gay marriage.  It means it’s not for her and such beliefs are consistent with the definition of freedom and equality in America.  There are some people believe it or not who are just fine with being heterosexual.  It doesn’t a priori mean s/he is a bigot or is “anti-gay.”  There are some gay people who disagree with Affirmative Action, and Mo’Kelly is smart enough to know, that doesn’t make them “anti-Black” either.  We should be able to differentiate and discern between the two; disagree without being disagreeable in the process.

Prejean has created no law to abridge the rights of any ethnic or sexual preference group and she’s done nothing to personally embarrass the Miss USA pageant as “some” have alleged.

She simply answered the question put before her.

She was asked for her honest opinion and she gave it.  She was not supposed to be evaluated on the basis of whether we found her to be “progressive enough” or “politically correct enough.”  Supposedly, her answer was to be judged on the merits of how thoroughly and well-constructed her answer ultimately was.

Guess not.

It’s a beauty pageant, not a political debate.  The only person who was unclear was Perez Hilton.

If Rev. Al Sharpton asked a racially charged question to Prejean and she answered the question in the same manner, staying true to her beliefs; Mo’Kelly would feel the same way.  She answered the question that was put before her, from a gay-rights activist blogger with an agenda.  The only person who should be ashamed was the person who asked the question under those circumstances.

It was a beauty pageant stage, not a political one to advance one’s personal platform.

What Hilton fails to understand and refuses to acknowledge is that marriage by definition is a religious ceremony, meaning it has religious overtones and connotations for many people.  If you should ask an Islamic man for his religious views and you don’t agree with Islam’s treatment of women, it’s both the man’s right to worship as he chooses and our right to disagree and even dislike those beliefs.  Freedom is a dialogue, not a monologue by those who may try to shout down all opposing viewpoints.

“Tolerance” is a two-way street.

Parallel:

There are plenty people in this country who believe in and support polygamy.  There are a number of religions which observe and encourage polygamy in this the 21st century.  Conversely,  polygamy is not a legal right.  Americans are “free” to worship as they choose, but we still are a society of laws which supersede some worship practices.

Polygamy has been outlawed by most societies, but there are schisms of Mormonism and Hinduism for example which hold it in high regard.

To the point…

What is irrefutable is that marriage is de facto a ceremony, a union borne of religious tradition, and is not a legal right in and of itself in any varying form we may see fit.  If it were, polygamy would be equally viable as a marriage union.  One can’t argue that a man has a “right” to marry a man, and ALSO argue a man doesn’t have the “right” to marry two women. Where does one draw the line…if at all?

Meaning…

Either there is a strict definition of marriage or there is NO definition of marriage at all.  One can’t have it both ways.  Draw the line somewhere or not at all.  Presently Mo’Kelly can’t legally “marry” two women simultaneously.  Is that discrimination?

Of course not.

In the end, Prejean should not be disrespected and ridiculed (openly or privately) because she does not agree with same-sex marriage.  Freedom of speech intimates dialogue, so those who disagree with her should engage her in dialogue not perverse disrespect.  Perez Hilton’s behavior has only ensured the widening of the gulf between gay marriage supporters and opponents.

He had ample opportunity to at the minimum engage her and the larger public in the debate about same-sex marriage in these subsequent moments.  He instead continued on his low-road, opting for “bitch” and “cunt” references.

How “enlightened” and “progressive” of him…

Yes, “persuasive arguments” they are…no doubt.  If someone didn’t agree with gay marriage before the Miss USA pageant, surely the chants of “bitch” and “cunt” will change their minds…

In addition, the longer people like Perez Hilton continue to help widen this gulf, the longer it will take for the genuine and widespread acceptance of same-sex marriage…assuming that’s Hilton’s goal.  Maybe Mo’Kelly and others have given him too much credit.  Acceptance can not be brow-beaten into being.

Respect is always earned…never demanded.

If the gay marriage movement wants to take anything away from the African-American civil rights movement, take that.

If Perez Hilton desires respect, acceptance and reverence for gay rights, gay marriage and gay people in general, the first prerequisite is to conduct oneself in a way demonstrative and consistent with respect and acceptance.  Until that time comes, he’s free to keep spinning his wheels and reinforcing all of the negative stereotypes promulgated in regards to same-sex marriage proponents.  Perez Hilton is obviously in no way ready for gay marriage in America.  And if he isn’t…he has no business trying to lecture anybody else on why we should be.

RELATED:

Blame Perez Hilton for Carrie Prejean Phenomenon

Why Prop 8 is Right…and Why it’s Ultimately Wrong

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.MrMoKelly.com.  Mo’Kelly can be reached at Mo@MrMoKelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

Subscribe to The Mo’Kelly Report HERE

This isn’t endearing me to the cause of gay rights…just FYI. THIS is NOT an extension of the African-American civil rights movement. This type of protest is unrighteous and rife with the same intolerance which they allegedly fight. Nothing like giving more and more people reason to NOT support you.

Homosexual activists in California have roughed up an elderly woman who believes in traditional marriage.

During protests over the past several days, homosexuals angry about the passage of Proposition 8, which reserves marriage licenses for a man and a woman, have hurled the N-word against black persons walking by, marched through police blockades, pounded on doors of businesses, and protested outside churches.

The dramatic coverage was on Palm Springs’ KPSP CBS 2, of 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess being assaulted, shouted at, spit at, and her cross destroyed by homosexual activists on November 7, 2008. At the urging of police, Burgess is pressing charges.

“This screaming and shouting, name-calling and pushing by homosexual activists is not unlike a small child throwing a fit because he doesn’t get his way,” said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, a leading California-based pro-family organization that supports marriage for one man and one woman. “The public is getting a clue that homosexual activists don’t like democracy and are willing to trample anyone and anything that gets in their way.”

“How is it that those who demand tolerance from others are so intolerant of the people’s vote to reserve marriage for a man and a woman?” asked Thomasson. “It looks like the No on 8 activists could use some diversity training. Homosexuals are demonstrating their intense intolerance against people of faith, people of color, and anyone who believes in real marriage between a man and a woman.”

“Most people are appalled by the violent, in-your-face behavior of homosexual activists,” said Thomasson. “This is very different from the peaceful marches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Of course, it has to be different. Then, people of color were asking for natural civil rights; today, homosexual activists are demanding that the public endorse their unnatural sexual behavior.”

CAMPAIGN FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (CCF) is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. CCF stands for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education. (Source: ChristianNewsWire.com)

RELATED: Why Prop 8 is Right and Why Ultimately It’s Wrong

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Newstex and Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.MrMoKelly.com.

Subscribe in a reader or by email

Help Bring Mo’Kelly to National Radio HERE

Visit Mo’Kelly’s GIFT SHOP HERE

Morris W. O’Kelly can be reached at Mo@MrMoKelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

var AdBrite_Title_Color = ‘E1771E’;
var AdBrite_Text_Color = ’9D1961′;
var AdBrite_Background_Color = ‘FFFFFF’;
var AdBrite_Border_Color = ‘CCCCCC’;
var AdBrite_URL_Color = ’0000FF’;
try{var AdBrite_Iframe=window.top!=window.self?2:1;var AdBrite_Referrer=document.referrer==”?document.location:document.referrer;AdBrite_Referrer=encodeURIComponent(AdBrite_Referrer);}catch(e){var AdBrite_Iframe=”;var AdBrite_Referrer=”;}

document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,83,67,82,73,80,84));document.write(‘ src=”http://ads.adbrite.com/mb/text_group.php?sid=857309&zs=3436385f3630&ifr=’+AdBrite_Iframe+’&ref=’+AdBrite_Referrer+’” type=”text/javascript”>’);document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,47,83,67,82,73,80,84,62));

This isn’t endearing me to the cause of gay rights…just FYI. THIS is NOT an extension of the African-American civil rights movement. This type of protest is unrighteous and rife with the same intolerance which they allegedly fight. Nothing like giving more and more people reason to NOT support you.

Homosexual activists in California have roughed up an elderly woman who believes in traditional marriage.

During protests over the past several days, homosexuals angry about the passage of Proposition 8, which reserves marriage licenses for a man and a woman, have hurled the N-word against black persons walking by, marched through police blockades, pounded on doors of businesses, and protested outside churches.

The dramatic coverage was on Palm Springs’ KPSP CBS 2, of 69-year-old Phyllis Burgess being assaulted, shouted at, spit at, and her cross destroyed by homosexual activists on November 7, 2008. At the urging of police, Burgess is pressing charges.

“This screaming and shouting, name-calling and pushing by homosexual activists is not unlike a small child throwing a fit because he doesn’t get his way,” said Randy Thomasson, president of Campaign for Children and Families, a leading California-based pro-family organization that supports marriage for one man and one woman. “The public is getting a clue that homosexual activists don’t like democracy and are willing to trample anyone and anything that gets in their way.”

“How is it that those who demand tolerance from others are so intolerant of the people’s vote to reserve marriage for a man and a woman?” asked Thomasson. “It looks like the No on 8 activists could use some diversity training. Homosexuals are demonstrating their intense intolerance against people of faith, people of color, and anyone who believes in real marriage between a man and a woman.”

“Most people are appalled by the violent, in-your-face behavior of homosexual activists,” said Thomasson. “This is very different from the peaceful marches of Martin Luther King, Jr. Of course, it has to be different. Then, people of color were asking for natural civil rights; today, homosexual activists are demanding that the public endorse their unnatural sexual behavior.”

CAMPAIGN FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (CCF) is a leading West Coast nonprofit, nonpartisan organization representing children and families. CCF stands for marriage and family, parental rights, the sanctity of human life, religious freedom, financial freedom, and back-to-basics education. (Source: ChristianNewsWire.com)

RELATED: Why Prop 8 is Right and Why Ultimately It’s Wrong

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Newstex and Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.MrMoKelly.com.

Subscribe in a reader or by email

Help Bring Mo’Kelly to National Radio HERE

Visit Mo’Kelly’s GIFT SHOP HERE

Morris W. O’Kelly can be reached at Mo@MrMoKelly.com and he welcomes all commentary.

var AdBrite_Title_Color = ‘E1771E’;
var AdBrite_Text_Color = ’9D1961′;
var AdBrite_Background_Color = ‘FFFFFF’;
var AdBrite_Border_Color = ‘CCCCCC’;
var AdBrite_URL_Color = ’0000FF’;
try{var AdBrite_Iframe=window.top!=window.self?2:1;var AdBrite_Referrer=document.referrer==”?document.location:document.referrer;AdBrite_Referrer=encodeURIComponent(AdBrite_Referrer);}catch(e){var AdBrite_Iframe=”;var AdBrite_Referrer=”;}

document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,83,67,82,73,80,84));document.write(‘ src=”http://ads.adbrite.com/mb/text_group.php?sid=857309&zs=3436385f3630&ifr=’+AdBrite_Iframe+’&ref=’+AdBrite_Referrer+’” type=”text/javascript”>’);document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,47,83,67,82,73,80,84,62));

The ongoing debate over Proposition 8 here in California, against the backdrop of President-elect Obama’s historic election has again ignited the civil rights discussion in comparing the strides of African-Americans and gays and lesbians.

My goal in touching upon this hotly contested and emotionally charged issue is to interject some semblance of intellectual honesty into the discussion. To do so, requires abandoning the emotion, which clouds all of our judgment.

In that sense, emotion is an equal opportunity offender, if you allow me one civil rights metaphor. African-Americans, we often let our emotional feelings about discrimination previously, cloud our judgment and prevent us from entering into reasoned discussion about civil rights presently. I would venture to say the same is true in regards to gays when discussing the issues of gay rights. These issues are intensely personal, entrenched in history and shake the foundation of our society. Why am I mentioning all of this?

It’s estimated that some 70% of African-Americans voted for the proposition.

That said…let’s put the emotion down folks and go from there.

First, this is where opponents of the measure have it wrong…

Proposition 8 ostensibly is to legally define “marriage” as a union between a man and woman. California does presently enjoy the most “liberal” domestic partner law in the country, and Proposition 8 has no ramifications on these laws.

Let’s remove the emotion…these are the facts.

So we know it’s not about “rights” in the sense of privilege or legal access. Please stop calling this a “civil rights” issue.

Respectfully, it is not.

Rights have to do with access and privileges; not titles of unions. There is a distinct difference. Civil rights by definition, is to rid discrimination of people in the eyes of the law. If we can agree that the legal rights of gay people are not negatively impacted here…then this is not a “civil rights” issue.

Let’s not mince words about “respect,” or “freedom” or “being treated differently.” Legally…gay couples would not be disadvantaged by Proposition 8 and that is what should be most important.

Hold on…breathe…opponents…hear me out. There’s more to this story.

Going further, although we are a nation built upon the premise of separation of church and state, the “premise” of marriage is borne out of religious tradition. The main differences between “civil unions,” “domestic partnerships” and “marriages” arguably all come down to this singular yet important distinction…and it’s relevant to the discussion.

Opponents of the measure can’t have it both ways. To use the term “marriage” yet not also acknowledge the religious implications of the word and all of what that entails is a contradiction. One does not need to agree with all of the tenets of religion to acknowledge the fact that marriage is by definition a ceremony based in religious tradition. Like it or loathe it, the religion(s) are unambiguous in this regard in its concept of “marriage.”

As much as gays demand that those opposed to a homosexual lifestyle “respect” their lifestyle and beliefs, that respect must flow both ways.

That’s where opponents of the measure have it wrong.

Now, let’s flip this over and look at it from the other side…unemotionally that is. This is where proponents of the measure have it wrong.

Not to oversimplify the argument, but the measure is excessive and mean-spirited in its conception and argumentation. One does not “need” to legally “define” marriage any more than one “needs” to legally “define” a high school baccalaureate service or a bar mitzvah. They too are steeped in religious tradition. Since proponents of the measure have openly argued that civil rights aren’t being taken away, then the real goal here is what? This measure ostensibly then serves as much purpose as legally defining said baccalaureate or bar mitzvah since the impact on legal rights and access (as PROPONENTS have argued) is none.

Hold on…breathe…proponents…hear me out. There’s more to be said.

There arguably is no “point” then other than “to make a point.” And that then leads even more credibility to the argument that the formulation of the bill is rooted in hatred of homosexuality.

This discussion is less about whether those opposed to gay marriage can push through such a law and more about whether they should in the first place.

The unemotional fact of the matter is that schools don’t “teach” marriage or the values supposedly attached to it. The responsibility for the values of children and their views on homosexuality will always lie with the parents. Never will a teacher outweigh the impact of active parenting.

If the parents are homophobic, then the children will most likely be homophobic, irrespective of what Mr. or Ms. Civics teacher has to say about the subject of marriage. To argue otherwise is specious in nature.

Going further, such fear tactics will always be tantamount to racism and discrimination. You will never hear me argue that those in opposition of the homosexual lifestyle should have to “accept” homosexuality. We all have our beliefs and our contrasting beliefs often times what makes this country great. But you will always hear me question the motivation of any superfluous legislation. There is no necessity for such a measure, not in letter or spirit of the law. It’s antagonistic and fundamentally contradicts the idea of separation of church and state. Its primary argument in support of it is based in religion. That “religion” knife cuts both ways in this discussion.

Where do we go from here?

We (African-Americans) are generally socially conservative yet politically progressive…hence the overwhelming support for the proposition. That isn’t odd to me. But two key points need to be stressed.

Gay rights supporters should not have an issue with African-Americans or those in support of the measure. They are not “traitors” to the civil rights movement. As stated before, this is not a civil rights issue. Also, African-Americans and others who support Gay rights generally must always be mindful and respectful of the reality that in this society; freedom means an ongoing dialogue, a freedom to disagree and a freedom to disapprove.

I’m not sure there’s any clear cut solution to this problem, but I am sure that this proposition only added to the problem, not decreased it. We are all worse off because of it.

And so there is no ambiguity…I voted no.

RELATED: The Right and Wrong of Amaechi/Hardaway

The Mo’Kelly Report is an entertainment journal with a political slant; published weekly at www.eurweb.com. It is meant to inform, infuse and incite meaningful discourse…as well as entertain. The Mo’Kelly Report is syndicated by Newstex and Blogburst. For more Mo’Kelly, http://www.mokellyreport.blogspot.com<
/a>.

Subscribe in a reader or by email

Help Bring Mo’Kelly to National Radio HERE

Visit Mo’Kelly’s GIFT SHOP HERE

Morris W. O’Kelly can be reached at mokellyreport@sbcglobal.net and he welcomes all commentary.

var AdBrite_Title_Color = ‘E1771E’;
var AdBrite_Text_Color = ’9D1961′;
var AdBrite_Background_Color = ‘FFFFFF’;
var AdBrite_Border_Color = ‘CCCCCC’;
var AdBrite_URL_Color = ’0000FF’;
try{var AdBrite_Iframe=window.top!=window.self?2:1;var AdBrite_Referrer=document.referrer==”?document.location:document.referrer;AdBrite_Referrer=encodeURIComponent(AdBrite_Referrer);}catch(e){var AdBrite_Iframe=”;var AdBrite_Referrer=”;}

document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,83,67,82,73,80,84));document.write(‘ src=”http://ads.adbrite.com/mb/text_group.php?sid=857309&zs=3436385f3630&ifr=’+AdBrite_Iframe+’&ref=’+AdBrite_Referrer+’” type=”text/javascript”>’);document.write(String.fromCharCode(60,47,83,67,82,73,80,84,62));