I boarded the train in a bit of a funk, still somewhat traumatized by the nightmares I'd woken up from that morning. I stood against the door, trying my best (and failing) to concentrate on the book in my hands.
The NYC Transit Authority--particularly the subway--is both the worst and only public transportation (besides taxis) in the area. Because of this, the humid underground trains are a veritable swamp of every type of person imaginable. Mumbling, yelling, breathing and sneezing. In surround sound. And they are completely unavoidable. Being somewhat xenophobic myself (and very misanthropic) I spend most of my time on the train trying to ignore those around me.
For whatever reason, angry and fed up people often view the subway as a stage and its occupants their audience. This time of year in particular seems to bring out the boldness in people. Bums are more frequent and aggressive, religious zealots are constantly trying to spread their misery to everyone else, even the everyday Joe--who normally has nothing to say (and is generally uninteresting himself) is voicing his opinion more often. You can imagine how frustrating this is while trying to read.
So, when another particularly outspoken Joe came onto the train that day, I buried my nose further into my book and managed to read the same paragraph about three times before realizing what he was saying.
"Religion and politics do not make a holy union!" he yelled. "You should be ashamed of yourselves! You Christians! Is that what you call yourselves? You should be ashamed. Religion and politics do not mix."
"Those of you who call yourselves Constitutionalists?!" He spit the word from his mouth." Have you ever even looked at the constitution? It says 'Separation of Church and State!' Right there on the page! So why are you trying to make the two mix? How does that make you more of a Christian? If you have to hide behind politics to make you feel like a better Christian, then you're doing something wrong."
"And how does two men getting married make you less of a Christian? In the Bible, when the people brought Mary Magdalene before Jesus and threw her at his feet as a harlot, he respected her! Jesus said we need to love everyone, regardless of their disposition. I'm a Christian, too! I know the Bible! Who are we to judge? That's God's job!"
What he said next killed me, because he said it with such conviction. It hurt me that he believed this about himself and that there were others around me who probably did too. "People sometimes discriminate against me because of my skin, sometimes people hate me for my skin, but I can't help the color I am! I was born this way!... and there have been times when I've looked down at my skin and wished that it was a different color, that I wasn't black. But it's not something I can change, this is how I was born. Leave them alone! You don't know what make a man gay or a woman a lesbian! You don't know if they can change that! I can't change my skin!"
By then I had stopped reading entirely, though I still held me book, too cowardly to look him in the eyes. But I wanted nothing more than to hug him.
"How does it make you less of a Christian for them to marry? If anything it makes you more of a Christian because it shows such great love. I'm a Christian too! And I don't think it's wrong for gays to marry. Leave them alone."
The train doors opened then, it was his stop. On his way out, the last things he said were, "Religion and politics don't mix. You should be ashamed of yourselves."
I couldn't agree more.
Actually, "separation of church and state" is NOT in the Constitution. It's not there. Thomas Jefferson mentioned it in 1802 in his letters, but it was never, ever, part of the Constitution. Anti-religions establishments often repeat this mantra when they wish to attack religion, but this is a groundless attack. It's sad that so many people actually do not read the Constitution and take many of the wrong cliches as facts.
ReplyDeleteAlso, "Constitutionalists" are not always Christians. He's mixing the two. His claims that Constitutionalists support Christianity is quite incorrect. Often, supporting the Constitution gets people in conflict with some religious groups.
The Constitution only made few mention of religion:
Article 6, at the end of the third clause:
"[N]o religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."
And it was mentioned in the 1st Amendment, along with free speech and all that good stuff.
So the ranting man got his facts quite wrong. I guess that's why he's ranting. It's too bad that he was discriminated, but so had I, and so had many people of all colors, yes, including white people. But I am not going to use the fact that I was discriminated against as an excuse to be misinformed about the Constitution.
Comparing gay marriage with racism is a wrong comparison. Otherwise, we can also us that to support sibling marriage, or under age marriage. Because, after all, there's no such ban in the Constitution against sibling marriage, is there. Nope.
One can argue about the finer points of civil liberties and pass various gay marriage laws, but confusing it with something like racism will not help the argument. That's why some states ALLOW gay marriage, and this ranting man failed to realize that.
-your wok-cooking friend.
Henry!
ReplyDeleteFirst, I want to make it clear that these are not my words but those of an angry man on the train. I certainly don't--and refuse to--take credit for his mistakes. However, I do think he makes some very important points (otherwise I wouldn't have posted this).
While "Separation of Church and State," may not be in the Constitution, it is (or should be) a generally accepted notion among those trying to make an intelligent argument. In order to make any kind of unbiased decision, any religion has to be disregarded. There are far too many contradicting ideals within every religion that can (and often do) limit our rights as humans.
As for his comparison between racial and sexual/marriage discrimination--I would have to disagree with you. The subject of Equal Marriage Rights is primarily one of discrimination and, while racial and sexual orientation discrimination are separate problems, they are not incomparable. After all, Black Americans were denied the right to marry other races in the early-to-mid 1900's based solely on racism.
Sibling and child marriage are a different conversation entirely. There is solid scientific evidence that the two can cause extreme physical deformities in offspring and serious mental/emotional scaring in children, while there are absolutely no scientific downsides to being gay or lesbian (other than their inability to reproduce together, though there are same sex couples who are unable to reproduce as well, and there are certainly plenty of children in need of adoption).
You're absolutely right about "Separation of Church and State" not being in the Constitution, but I'm going to have to--if it's ok with you--agree to disagree with you on the man's point about racism and sexual orientation discrimination.
Also, we should definitely talk about cooking again soon! That was super fun the other day. Also, I really love your photography :O)
I know those are his words.
ReplyDeleteI don't have issue one way or the other how people FEEL about the issue. But the problem is, there are feelings, and there are facts... "separation of church and state" is not in the Constitution, saying it is, or how we should feel about it has no bearing on the fact. The man asking people to read it is an obvious indication that he had not read it himself. Those who kept on repeating this same line also shows a great ignorance of this very basic fact. It's like saying, "hotdogs are good, it's in the Constitution, go read it."
The matter of fact is: the Constitution does not put Religion above or below a state. It simply prevents the government from regulating it. In that, it frees the churches and faiths from the tyrannical hands of the government, and it frees the government from the ever expanding hands of do-gooders from the church to meddle in political affairs.
Regarding racism and gays: I agree with you that they are both discriminatory issues, but comparing a genetic discrimination [skin color] with gay/lesbian discrimination [which the people within the group often do not agree it's genetic] is a dangerous route. Not all discrimination are the same.
Blacks were not allowed to marry whites was a genetic argument, some states of the time used the same argument you said about sibling marriages: they used miscegenation as the excuse to disallow marriage. To them, that's solid scientific evidence. To them, it was settled. To them, there's a huge genetic disadvantage to interracial marriage.
Living in NY for 10+ years, I've seen a lot of blind and vicious discrimination against people from midwest states, as well as vicious anti-religious speech in NY city, like the ranting man and his anti-Christian rant based on his wrong believe of the Constitution.
If we really to argue that any form of racism is comparable anti-gay, then one can argue, racism, anti-gay, anti-midwest, as well as anti-religion are also comparable with anti gay and anti blacks.
So, that guy who ranted against the Christians, is as terrible as those who were racist against him, based on the fact that these are comparable discrimination?
See, dangerous route.
And if anything, the man shouting should thank the Constitutionalists. It's these people who believe in the Constitution, support states to have the right to pass gay marriage laws, because the 10th Amendment basically gives the states the rights to pass laws not delegated to the federal government.
And it was this same amendment that DID allow blacks to marry whites while some states banned it.
Kinda like, biting the hand that fed him.
Embracing the Constitution is what gives gays and lesbian in many states a chance to change the law. Mocking it will not.
It's totally OK that we don't agree it's comparable or not. It's not a big deal to me. I just see that there are too many loopholes when people try to compare them.
ReplyDeleteEither way, I can't help it but to correct people [the ranting man] when they try to make a mockery of the Constitution with factual incorrect assumptions. The Constitution is pretty straight forward, very few words, and one of the easiest to understand compare to the monstrosity of various laws that came later.