Work That Constitution, Baby!
The sudden interest in gay marriage in the U.S. is completely ridiculous and mostly diversionary in nature for President Bush. I understand that to the President and his cronies a happily confused and glaringly stupid voting populace is ideal for reelection and the passage of restrictive laws. But really, do we have to create such turmoil among a group that is finally celebrating SOME acceptance in the Land of the Free?
What I propose to do here is offer some solutions to the problem with gays in the U.S. and their nagging, incessant need to celebrate unions with the people they love, provide legal and financial benefits to their spouses, and grant them equal rights and freedoms as guaranteed in the Constitution.
Being an entertainer, Im practically prohibited by law from having problems with gay people. But lets look at some scenarios anyway.
If all gay men disappeared, there would be a sudden decrease in movies, plays, circuses, television shows & entertainment agencies for me to enjoy and work within. Id never have any good looking clothes to wear on stage and my hair would always be a disaster. At the absolute least, Id never be able to watch Queer Eye again and that alone would be catastrophic. And who the HELL would they get to be the center square on Hollywood Squares?
Take all the lesbians out of the equation and there could be some improvements. Without them wed have no Rosie ODonnell or Ellen DeGeneres on our screens, no K.D. Lang or Melissa Etheridge music and no Xena, Warrior Princess and hot girl-on-girl action in our porno - WAIT! Forget I said anything!
Now aside from the stereotypical examples Ive laid out above (Hey, I laid out some lesbians. COOL!), homosexuals are in every aspect of our lives. They are no different from anyone else. Like all people, there are good people and there are bad people. They swear, burp & watch HBO like the rest of us. Granted, they may only be watching Oz, but it still counts. Do homosexuals pay taxes and vote like the rest of us? Damn right they do, and therein lies the solution.
This is an election year in the States, and our President, hoping the capture of Saddam and the fall of the Twin Towers is enough to fool us, has decided that the ONLY way to stop same sex couples from getting married is to add an ammendment to the Constitution. I say, why stop there? Why not take away citizenship altogether?
I dont know the actual statistics, but it is safe to say that there are millions of voting-age homosexuals in the United States. Lets just go ahead and make them, somehow, less than actual people. Lets create some sort of non-voting, non-tax-paying social class so they truly dont matter at all politically, but can still provide wacky neighbor characters in sit-coms.
If these folks have no political power in the form of a vote and no vested interest in the country in the form of tax dollars then maybe theyll all just leave the U.S. entirely. Theyd also have more money for SHOES! Maybe theyll all reject Mother Natures wisdom and CHANGE their make-up (genetic make-up, not Lancome) and become straight people. Then all they would have to do is move to some place where former homos would feel comfortable, like Rhode Island or Baltimore. I hear Idaho is pretty nice. Once reformed, we could let them pay taxes again and vote for officials. THEN, theyd matter. Then theyd be accepted and [113.2]loved, like black people and minorities are today.
Id rather that these folks get their marriage licenses and benefits. Until then, Im hoping that theyll use the Constitution to help their cause.
The 1st amendment gives them the right to free speech, and therefore, the right to tell the government how angry they are over this issue. I do like the prospect of a complete NON-vote from the gay community or a public endorsement of a dark-horse candidate, but thats only because I know that EVERY politician would rather have the vote than not. Now unless the ENTIRE gay population of the U.S. is planning on starting its own union or can unilaterally agree to vote for the same guy in order to show their actual voting power, I think the only solution is to stage a demonstration in Washington. This would not only make a large and loud statement, but it would certainly appeal to the gay community. A march on Washington? Oh goodie, a PARADE! Count me in! I can only imagine how cool THAT demonstration would be in D.C.. Thered be signs saying, We Registered to Vote, Let us Register at Macys. Thered be Depeche Mode music playing and the Potomac would flow with Red Bull. Of course theyd want to have the demonstration in the fall, not just to be closer to the election, but to see the leaves turning at that time of year!
If this doesnt help, they could always use the 2nd amendment to their advantage. If the politicians think that gays are dangers to society now, just wait and see how scared they become when fags are packing heat! A nice gay militia, as protected by the 2nd amendment, filled with well-armed men sporting well-toned abs, would surely get some attention. And dont forget the lesbians! Chicks with guns kick ass! Theyll make the Republicans and the religious folks shake in their sensible shoes (all from last season, mind you). A bunch of pissed off lesbians & gays with guns might make the NRA rethink their position about handguns. More likely theyll just want to get a new homo-hunting season added to the books (which would make mounting the head take on a whole new meaning).
Perhaps the best of the amendments to cite here when discussing this matter are the oft-forgotten 9th & 10th amendments. As they are written in the Constitution:
IX: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
X: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.
Im no Constitutional scholar, but Im fairly sure these amendments give the gay community the right to at the very least, enjoy marital benefits in the cities and states allowing the ceremonies to occur. Oddly enough, in 2000, President Bush would never talk about gay marriage except to say that it is strictly a states rights issue. I think that when the President is considering writing a brand new ammendment, he might want to reexamine the first ten just to hedge his bets a bit.
We should try to facilitate the possibility of every group having a fair shot at living the American dream. When it comes to simple human rights and needs, politics should never interfere. Washington will never have the right to tell me or any of my friends whom to love and it should follow that they shouldnt have the right to tell them HOW to love either. However, if all the voters in this country dont take a serious look at this years election and its candidates, Washington will soon have the POWER to do so.