Post by amandac02 on Nov 11, 2007 20:46:50 GMT -5
Far Beyond the "Not Gay" Chant: The Need to Break Tradition in the Quest for Gay Rights
“We come from Old Virginia, where all is bright and gay,” begins the “Good Ol’ Song,” the University of Virginia’s alma mater. However, at this point, University students take it upon themselves to add in a chant of their own: the two words, “Not gay!” In an effort to put an end to this tasteless custom, the University’s “Society of Purple Shadows” scattered posters across the campus that read, “End the ‘Not gay’ chant: Tradition is among the most distinctive hallmarks of the University experience. Traditions should enrich and strengthen our community. Chanting ‘Not gay’ during the ‘Good Ol’ Song’ is not a tradition.” These posters speak out against the utilization of “tradition” as a means to justify discrimination against homosexuals, a tactic used, unfortunately, far beyond the grounds of the University.
The United States of America’s own President George W. Bush stated on June 5, 2006 that a Constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage would serve to “protect the institution of marriage" (GOP). This “institution” to which Bush refers is nothing more than tradition; the union of a man and a woman is only the customary notion of marriage. There is no divine law insisting that this convention is unalterable. Surely Martin Luther King Jr. was not concerned about protecting the institution of racial superiority when he declared, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Surely Patrick Henry was not worried about the country’s traditional place under the tyranny of Great Britain when he asserted, “Give me liberty or give me death!” The very foundation of America’s independence was built, not on the doctrine of tradition, but on that of dissent, the rebellion against England, the mother country that had controlled it for so long.
On November 8, 2007, the House of Representatives passed a bill protecting gay and bisexual workers against professional discrimination. Under this bill, one cannot “fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation” (Hersenhorn). While the passing of this bill in the House is a significant step toward the initiation of a new law, such prospects do not look very promising: President Bush has expressed opinions against the bill, and the congressional vote falls short of the three-quarters majority needed to override a veto. Therefore, it is imperative that Americans continue to fight for a law ensuring tolerance of homosexuality. Americans must take a stand; they must speak out to support the group that has been oppressed for so long. Only this individual initiative will lead to acceptance, the disregarding of oppressive traditions, and the guarantee of “liberty and justice for all.”
Word Count: 483
Sources:
GOP renews fight against gay marriage. June 6, 2006. www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/05/same.sex.marriage/index.html
Hersenhorn, David M. House Approves Broad Protections for Gay Workers. November 8, 2007. www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/washington/08employ.html?ex=1352178000&en=a2a29543635b6655&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=
“We come from Old Virginia, where all is bright and gay,” begins the “Good Ol’ Song,” the University of Virginia’s alma mater. However, at this point, University students take it upon themselves to add in a chant of their own: the two words, “Not gay!” In an effort to put an end to this tasteless custom, the University’s “Society of Purple Shadows” scattered posters across the campus that read, “End the ‘Not gay’ chant: Tradition is among the most distinctive hallmarks of the University experience. Traditions should enrich and strengthen our community. Chanting ‘Not gay’ during the ‘Good Ol’ Song’ is not a tradition.” These posters speak out against the utilization of “tradition” as a means to justify discrimination against homosexuals, a tactic used, unfortunately, far beyond the grounds of the University.
The United States of America’s own President George W. Bush stated on June 5, 2006 that a Constitutional amendment prohibiting same-sex marriage would serve to “protect the institution of marriage" (GOP). This “institution” to which Bush refers is nothing more than tradition; the union of a man and a woman is only the customary notion of marriage. There is no divine law insisting that this convention is unalterable. Surely Martin Luther King Jr. was not concerned about protecting the institution of racial superiority when he declared, “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Surely Patrick Henry was not worried about the country’s traditional place under the tyranny of Great Britain when he asserted, “Give me liberty or give me death!” The very foundation of America’s independence was built, not on the doctrine of tradition, but on that of dissent, the rebellion against England, the mother country that had controlled it for so long.
On November 8, 2007, the House of Representatives passed a bill protecting gay and bisexual workers against professional discrimination. Under this bill, one cannot “fail or refuse to hire or to discharge any individual, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to the compensation, terms, conditions or privileges of employment of the individual, because of such individual’s actual or perceived sexual orientation” (Hersenhorn). While the passing of this bill in the House is a significant step toward the initiation of a new law, such prospects do not look very promising: President Bush has expressed opinions against the bill, and the congressional vote falls short of the three-quarters majority needed to override a veto. Therefore, it is imperative that Americans continue to fight for a law ensuring tolerance of homosexuality. Americans must take a stand; they must speak out to support the group that has been oppressed for so long. Only this individual initiative will lead to acceptance, the disregarding of oppressive traditions, and the guarantee of “liberty and justice for all.”
Word Count: 483
Sources:
GOP renews fight against gay marriage. June 6, 2006. www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/06/05/same.sex.marriage/index.html
Hersenhorn, David M. House Approves Broad Protections for Gay Workers. November 8, 2007. www.nytimes.com/2007/11/08/washington/08employ.html?ex=1352178000&en=a2a29543635b6655&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=