An 18 Year Old High-Schooler is Destroying America, Apparently

 18 year old Constance McMillen was the subject of an AP article today because she requested that she and her gay girlfriend, another student in the same school, be allowed to attend the prom as a couple.  The school, in Jackson, MS has a rule that prom couples must be a boy and a girl.  When McMillen's request was denied, she sued, with the backing of the ACLU.  The school's response was to cancel the prom for everyone rather than allow two girls to dance together.  Of course everyone knows why the prom was canceled so this girl is likely to be the target of anger from her fellow students.

People in Mississippi have demonstrated their bigotry and willingness to deny people their civil rights many times before, so this event isn't surprising, but the bigots always end up losing in court.  So, when will experience teach them that people they dislike have just as many rights as those they like?

The prejudice against homosexuals is completely irrational, any way.  No one just decides one day that they would like to be shunned, avoided, and have the crap beaten out of them by fellow students, co-workers and neighbors just because it might be fun to share a bed with someone of the same sex.  The only reason the anti-gay people can present to rationalize their hatred is their religious beliefs supported by cherry-picked lines from their favorite book.

Religious beliefs, however, are not civil law.  If these people want to deny homosexuals access to their religious ceremonies, that's OK.  If persons choose not to act on their own homosexual urges, because their religion doesn't allow it, that's fine too.  But, when one leaves the religious environment and enters the secular, as, for instance, a public school, civil law applies and insisting that persons outside of the religious community must abide by rules that apply only within the religious community, is not only ridiculous, it's illegal.

S. C. Talking Secession Again

OK, it's just the Episcopal Church of South Carolina that wants to distance itself, but not completely divorce itself, from the national church. The S. C. Diocese doesn't like the way the national church has allowed Gay bishops in the church or their tolerance of same sex unions.

At least the S. C. Episcopals are remaining consistent with the state's historic level of tolerance for minority groups, and bigotry is really what this is all about. Although those opposed to rights for GLBT folk have always supported their position with scripture, it's often pointed out that the same oppossers are more than happy to disregard any scripture that forbids something they like (shrimp cocktail, any one?) and the signs of simple bigotry are obvious.

When there is irrational hatred of a group there is a constantly moving target that must be hit by that group for acceptance. For GLBT's, they were criticised for being out of the mainstream, so they demonstrated their value in all sorts of occupations. Then the target moved. They were told they were too promiscuous in their private lives, so they made people aware that they were settled in long term monogamous relationships. So, the target moved again. The bigots insist their relationships are a mockery of real marriage; and on and on it goes.

History has many examples of this moving target treatment, with Blacks, Native Americans, religious minorities as a few examples. Some people just seem to need a group or groups to hate. The hatred never completely goes away but when a group can no longer be attacked in polite society, one can watch the bigots test the waters by attacking different groups until they find one for whom they can show intolerance without social repercussions. Gays are a great choice, because if you defend the gays, you can be accused of being a bad Xian.

Since a fair percentage of people seem to live to hate others, there will always be victims of bigotry in this country, but if we could convince South Carolina to secede again, then quickly fence them off before they can change their minds, it just might send a message to the rest of the country; if you want to advocate intolerance in the name of an entire state, there can be some very negative consequences.