Is discrimination bigotry? I ask because of some items that came across my desk this morning, that got me started thinking about what we call bigotry and what we don’t. When it comes to same-sex marriage, for example, there are people who — at least publicly — oppose it, but would take offense at being called bigots. In order to demonstrate how bigoted they aren’t, they might even go as far as supporting “separate but equal” civil unions.
What got me started thinking about the above this morning was an article about gay groups comparing Schwartzeneggar to George Wallace, because of his promise to veto the same-sex marriage bill passed by the state legislature.
Gay rights activists plan to air a television commercial this week that compares Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s forthcoming veto of a bill that would legalize same-sex marriage in California to the segregationist policies of former Alabama Gov. George Wallace.
The 30-second ad is scheduled to begin airing on cable television stations in Los Angeles and Sacramento on Thursday, the day before the gay marriage bill Schwarzenegger has repeatedly vowed to veto reaches his desk. The governor has until Oct. 9 to sign, veto or let the bill become law without his signature
Is Arnold as much of a bigot as George Wallace was? Is he figuratively standing in the chapel door, as Wallace literally stood in the schoolhouse door?
This morning the headline “ Harvard Law embraces bigotry in exchange for cold hard cash” blared from Americablog, in response to the school’s decision to allow military recruiters back on campus — despite the fact that the military’s discriminatory policy violates the school’s nondiscrimination policy. Also this morning Andrew Sullivan cheered the move, while at the same time urging people to oppose the military’s discriminatory policy.
I was a campaigner against the military’s ban on gays earlier than many and I still am. But I’m also a supporter of having the best military we can, and at a time of war, that means letting them recruit on campus, despite their vile discrimination policies. I’m glad my alma mater has allowed them back in. Now let’s renew the campaign against this terrible and self-defeating policy. This website is a good place to start.
Is it possible to have it both ways — to be both for and against — where bigotry is concerned? Does it ever serve the greater good to look the other way?
Can we even call it bigotry anymore? Does it do any good?
#1 Schwarzenegger and Wallace–can we call them equal but different bigots? Schwarzenneger smiles for the cameras and wears expensive suits, but they are both about denying fundamental rights to groups of Americans.
#2 America at large seems enamored of compromise. It sickens me.
Andrew Sullivan translation: "I’m down with bigotry so long as there’s something in it for me."
I couldn’t disagree more.
Either we condemn bigotry, and it is wrong all the time…or, we are bigots. Part of the problem or part of the solution. Or, to put it in American terms, "you’re either with us or against us."
It’s possible to have it both ways–so long as we always want to live with bigotry.
And can bigotry server the greater good?–if and only if "greater good" equals mob rule where discriminating against or oppressing a minority is viewed in the selfish interest of the mob.
Telling the truth always helps. Calling atrocities by their proper names always helps.
It doesn’t always help quickly, but progressive change and social justice are life commitments, not a weekend project.
I hear you. And it is crazy making. But calling out lies and injustice and oppression is the right thing.
Great Shaula: Love It or Leave It, in liberal garb.
There are reasons that people have for opposing gay marriage that have nothing to do with bigotry. Many older folks still have it in their minds that gay men are spectacularly promiscuous — or will be, again, when this Aids thing blows over — and are somehow not disposed to fidelity. This was widely the belief in, say, 1979. Plus many connect marriage with children and believe it is quite rare for gay couples to have kids. Plus, there is something that concerns me: Discrimination against single people who pay a disproportionate amount of taxes.
I am opposed to gay marriage and in favor of ending marriage altogether. Let us make civil unions available for couples of all gender combinations. Yes, let us REALLY have equality.
There are reasons that people have for opposing gay marriage that have nothing to do with bigotry.
There are rationalizations that people come up with for opposing gay marriage that have nothing to do with bigotry. But reasons, no.
Great, worldcitizen: A bigot is now defined as anyone who disagrees with you. That’s the brick road to totalitarianism.
FYI: While I am ‘opposed’ to Gay Marriage if all options are possible, so long as ending marriage altogether is highly unlikely, I would vote for it. I don’t want perfect to be the enemy of the good.
There are reasons that people have for opposing gay marriage that have nothing to do with bigotry.
No – the reason you listed is a reason for opposing ALL marriage – not just gay marriage – you said so yourself.
I can’t think of any “reason” to single out gay marriage and oppose it (while not similarly opposing straight marriage) that does not reek of bigotry.