i can't believe we're still arguing this

i am always happy to hear news from home...well, not always.

a person can be rational, people border on idiotic at times. i had high hopes and renewed faith in people, what with the overwhelming success of obama's election. i had hoped his message of acceptance and cooperation between all americans had struck a chord with the general population. i guess there are always exceptions...

proposition (H)8 in california, and then this last week.

i've never had a real reason to read the daily. mostly, i checked to see how many days were left in the quarter every so many mornings on my way to class. but now, i have lost all respect for this publication and its editing staff.

this article should not have been published. i mean...seriously?

"Race is a biological state; homosexuality is more of an emotional condition, and we should not, for that reason alone, start passing laws condoning it.

Being homosexual, like other emotional tendencies, doesn’t make someone a bad person, but it’s a problem that needs to be dealt with, not denied."

fuck.
that.
shit.

the idea of 'race' stems from the bizarre notion that differentiating physical characteristics somehow fundamentally divide one person from another; that the color of somebody's skin makes them more important than everybody else. phrenology is fucking dead. we're all homo sapiens in the end, so who the FUCK is going to deny any human being their right to fairly love another.

i know many gay people-they are my friends and my family. they are no more emotionally unstable than i and they certainly are no less human than you...but they are fucking angry. they are angry that they have been relegated to existing as second-class citizens while nervous people accuse them of deadly sin and initiating the downfall of american society. fuck you, people.

according to responses from the staff, this article was actually sent back to be re-written before this crumbling rhetoric could be published. in comparison to the rebuttal article that was printed in juxtaposition, Fay's article is hardly a shining example of journalistic prowess. i thought the purpose of the daily was to foster meaningful discussion through dialogue that reflects the high standards to which the university of washington has always been held. this is barely tabloid worthy writing. i am sick of bigoted people letting hateful communication slide.

i am tired of not being able to discuss this topic without somebody spewing tales of slippery slopes and the sub-humanity of the gay, bisexual, lesbian, and transgendered community. the individuality that defines the human condition simultaneously defies all labels, categorization and conjecture. to define sexuality in terms of black and white, or even shades of gray, is preposterous.

i know that the daily was within its first amendment rights to print this article, but unfortunately the first amendment allows racists, bigots, and the fucking brainless to keep on hating. this is just filthy journalism. if you want to make an argument, cease the rhetoric and cease the dogma; give me something reasonable to chew on for a while, and then we'll talk.

one supposedly rational person commented on the rebuttal, "The gay community will have my 'respect' when they demonstrate that they are deserving of it. That won't be anytime in the near future."

every human experiences love and desire. let's at least respect that.