Question J

I think this video demonstrates the narrow-mindedness that is prominent in politics. Let me just say that I wanted to smack that ignorant girl in the face who said that no one should be passing judgement on the Freeholders. What were they doing to Laurel Hester and Stacie? Freeholder Kelly wouldn't even show up to the emergency meeting because he believes gay and lesiban relationships are morally wrong.He was passing judgement on them for being in a homosexual relationship. When that girl got up there and TRIED to be cute I think she missed the a key point. Those kinds of forums are for people to say what they need to say to the people who govern them. I didn't think any of the things people said were outrageous or  even unnecessary. I feel like anyone in a homosexual relationship should be allowed the same rights and privileges that heterosexuals recieve. If Freeholder Kelly was allowed to base his opinion on the fact that the couple is homosexual and that's the only reasoning he has, then people should be allowed to defend themselves. It's called public discourse and that girl was more or less saying that everyone should be nice to each other, which was most certainly not going to happen, and what they said was not even bad! If they told her she couldn't be that tan because tanning is morally wrong I am sure she would have some choice words to say to the Freeholders. It would make more sense for them to stand against the over use of tanning beds because they can actually cause the loss of human life. The general public tends to go against biggotry, or at least I hope so.  We know that biggotry was behind the initial suggestion based on the fact that Kelly brought his own moral beliefs into it as I am sure the other Freeholders did. Not to mention, when one woman asked if they went out and got married that night would the decision change and the Freeholders said yes that makes their argument seen even more weak. The thing about politics that jeopardizes the rights of homosexual couples is that the government is hypocritical. They say that their is a separation between church and state, so why do we hear so much about how God or The Bible says that homosexual relationships are wrong. In case no one in politics noticed, both God and The Bible fall under the "church" category. Oppresion is caused by peoples so-called moral beliefs. Morals, a lot of the time are used as a disguise for fear. It reminds me of how people fear change, or at least that is the saying. Well, homosexual relationships are a change. I liked what one man said about the seperate drinking fountains and sitting at the back of the bus. That made me think that everything is about power. I have a nephew who is five and a niece who is 3. They fight all the time over toys, not because they want to play with them, but because they want to have them in their power. My nephew, Damitri, gets upeset not because he does not want Rose to have the toys because she'll break them or she will lose pieces, but because they are his and he wants power. Its the whole mine thing and man does it get tiring.  I feel like that is the best way to describe the Freeholders...as children fighting with the general public. The only difference is that these Councilmen are supposed to be educated and rather than toys they are fighting over civil rights, which in essence are not rights that belong to them to fight over anyway. They were Laurel Hester's rights.  I think the Govenor stepped in because he did not want to deal with the backlash that NJ would have to face for being ignorant or hypocritical. I'm glad Stacie got what she deserved in the end because it was the right of her partner to give it to her in the first place. They should have had that time to be together rather than to spend it fighting for their rights.