Rights for Everybody, Except You.

I'm almost certain it was Rachel Maddow who brought up this point: If rights were really rights, how can you decide, all of the sudden they're up for grabs?  If it is my "right" to exist, to pursue happiness, liberty, etc, then there ought to be no exception whatsoever to that deal.  I think it's important to note that no group of oppressed people has ever gained rights denied by their oppressor without both a long fight, and some power transfer from the oppressor to the oppressed. 

The big bully in the playground who is always stealing the lunch money from the nerdy kid (OK, me), always wins.  Because the bully is stronger than the other kid, the weaker kid loses.  The bullied do not get to decide on what terms they may be bullied.  Albeit a farcical example, I maintain that it is a prime example for what is going on today in civil rights issues, women's rights, and bi-partisanship politics as a whole.  The money never belonged to the bully, and the bully's own lunch money was never at risk to begin with.  Against all good judgement whatsoever, I watched a clip of Ann Coulter regarding the repeal of DADT on YouTube.  "Putting girls and gays in the military, we're not taking the military seriously," are actually words that came flying out of her mouth. 

Warning! This clip may cause you to have a severe anxiety/rage episode, before playing, remove all sharp objects from arm's length.

Girls and gays are going to ruin the military?  The problem I have with this is that when you have someone whose function is to say outlandish things, and you are passing that off as news, the uninformed people who watch "entertainment news" are not even close to getting the actual truth. 

I must also add as a disclaimer that I'm an avid Rachel Maddow Show fan, because even though I'm super-liberal, the information she presents is the truth, not just some insane opinions. 

But back to the clip.  They're saying that most of the people who wanted DADT to be repealed are against the military.  Seriously?  Most of the people who fought so hard for DADT are or were IN the military!  How can someone be a vocal advocate for a policy that discriminates against who they are?! 

For the purposes of continuing with my analogy of the schoolyard bully, the LGBT service members who are subjected to unfair, discriminatory policy never tried to take away the rights of the heterosexist patriarchal oppressors.  They just did their jobs, lied about who they were, faced losing their careers, and died on the battlefield along with their straight peers.  The bully's rights were never in question, so why should the other kid's?

*It is also important to mention that I am also vehemently against bullying, and that in the end, the bully almost always ends up divorced, overweight, unhappy, and with a terrible comb-over.