Joe's POZ Blog

The post concerning new laws, allowing health care providers to not treat someone if the procedure or the actual patient somehow goes against the beliefs of that provider, was the last straw. These proposed laws are just an extension of the laws that started with some pharmacists gaining the leeway to not dispense certain medications, such as the “morning after” pill and it represents a cancer that continues to spread. We appear to be a society run amok and if we don’t stop it now, this growing intolerance will open the floodgates to establish even more laws that promote nothing but hatred and discrimination against millions of Americans.

Intolerance is defined as the quality of being intolerant; refusal to allow others the enjoyment of their opinions, chosen modes of worship, and the like; want of patience and forbearance; bigotry; as, intolerance shown toward a religious sect. It has become an epidemic; from opposition to abortion, unnecessary HIV transmission laws, laws against gays, evolution versus creationism and the latest, killing over cartoons.

The health care provider laws are just another step towards legalized intolerance and discrimination. If you want to be a health care provider, but there are aspects of that job that you find morally reprehensible, then I suggest you find another job or work in an area of health care that does not involve those objectionable aspects. It’s one thing, for society as a whole to determine what is tolerated, but never just the individual. It’s the same reasoning that supports our representative form of government, because history tells us what some people will do when given too much unfettered power: they will use that power to force their beliefs on others.

I can hear it now, the accusations that I might be taking this personally and that I am just as intolerant as those whom I am railing against, but the difference is that I am promoting intolerance toward intolerance in any form, while many are promoting intolerance against me specifically as someone who happens to be gay and has HIV. So forgive me if I take this personally, but they made it personal, and if they can’t support their convictions, through rational, logical and substantiated reasoning, as opposed to some dogma-based beliefs, they have no business seeking to codify them into law. Those who support these laws are supporting a belief all right, the belief that they can judge others with impunity. Go ahead and judge, just don’t expect me to allow you to have the rule of law behind those judgments.

It’s time that we stand up and demand the truth from anyone who proposes legislating morals or beliefs. Whether it is abortion, HIV or being gay, none of these are illegal and as such, there is no call for discrimination against any of them, nor their recipients or patients and certainly not laws supporting such discrimination. The time has come for the tolerant among us to confront this hatred and expose its’ true purpose.

Being against abortion, or certain groups of people, is certainly your right and if that is the case, then don’t work in a profession that might involve those groups. This might limit some people’s options as to a profession, but society has a history of demanding that we all sacrifice some aspects of our lives, for the good of society. You are entitled to what you believe, but beliefs that are outside of those that society actively supports, are your choice and it is your responsibility to shoulder the burden of those beliefs, if they involve discrimination against others. There is a reason that our society supports the tenet of “My rights end, where your rights begin” and that can be no more relevant than in reference to medical services.

Everyone needs medical services and since there is limited access to health care professionals, each such professional must serve all segments of society. How are woman going to access abortion services in a small community, with limited medical services, if the only providers of those services, are allowed to shun such women, not only with impunity, but the rule of law? Or maybe you need to travel a few hundred miles for medical care because “some” people object to pos people and will not allow a local HIV clinic. Or just maybe, our government will need to extend it’s reach to include censorship of our media, so as not to offend certain groups or faiths. The list of possible horrors is endless.

Then there are those who refuse to accept what has transpired in the field of science over the past decades. They appear to be unflappable and they support substituting their unsubstantiated belief(s) over empirical evidence and ask that we accept ignorance over knowledge. What is most dangerous about these type of people, however, is that not only do they allow their unsubstantiated beliefs to trump scientific findings, is that they demand to use the power of the state to impose these beliefs on others as being equivalent to empirical evidence. They don’t care about what constitutes knowledge, but rather seek to force our beliefs to mirror their own, no matter how misplaced or dangerous that might be.

I can think of no better example of these types of zealots than those who insist that creationism be given equal footing with evolution as a scientific theory. They even renamed the belief, “Intelligent Design” like that would somehow make their belief sound more scientific. I’m really trying to be tolerant here and I support their right to their beliefs, but they really need to stop trying to force their beliefs down everyone’s throat.

Creationism is not based on empirical evidence, but rather a belief in the Bible, a document that not even religious scholars can discern the “true” meaning of, yet its supporters insist that creationist dogma be accepted as truth. Unfortunately, it cannot be substantiated through scientific means and as such, it is not a scientific theory, is not an equivalent to the theory of evolution and therefore has no place in any science class. They certainly remain determined however as many now insist that scientific theory(s) are not proven through empirical evidence, because they are just a “theory”. No matter how much semantic gymnastics they might try to employ, creationism beliefs are simply that, beliefs. Again, groups are attempting to use intolerance to promote ignorance rather than knowledge.

The effects of these zealots who insist on replacing scientific knowledge with dogma can be seen across this country. Whether it’s the CDC website promoting abstinence over condoms or much of the pathetic STD prevention information that is distributed in our schools, clubs and bars, our HIV prevention messages are dripping with dogma. And not to be content with just polluting the American landscape, the Bush administration has taken upon itself to decree morals for other countries that receive our foreign aid. Our government is telling people that abstinence is sufficient to thwart STDs and HIV and they even penalize countries that want to include scientific based information on known HIV prevention measures, or worse, those who want to distribute condoms to stem the tide of massive HIV infections. It appears that we will give them money by demanding they accept our judgments on what is best for their country. How arrogant can some people become in forcing their beliefs on others?

Then we have the recent rioting over cartoons that while undeniably offensive to Muslims, has provoked an overreaction that has claimed at least three lives. Three people killed over a set of cartoons, insulting yes, but certainly nothing justifying such violence. Opportunistic governments and clerics are using this issue to inflame their citizens and are essentially suggesting that the written word is now sufficient provocation for addressing such written insults through brutal force. They are suggesting that their faith trump the expression of fee thought and that their right to be insulted eclipses any other rights. Sorry, but your right to be insulted ended well short, of the right to free expression and light-years short of the right to life.

Not to be out done, it appears that parts of the Muslim world, while horribly offended regarding their own Prophet Muhammad, see no problems in exacerbating this issue and Iran is sponsoring a campaign, to develop cartoons as insulting as possible concerning the Holocaust? So it's a sin to blaspheme Mohammad but perfectly fine to blaspheme any other diety? They will promote intolerance towards a free press and then turn right around and use their government run presses to defame another religious group. They claim they are doing this to see how the world reacts to such blasphemy against Jews and I expect that they will be sorely disappointed. The world will react all right, but it is them who will be condemned in world opinion and I highly doubt that anyone will die as a result. Surely there is more going on here than just some overreaction to the printed word and I fear that intolerance is reaching idangerous levels.

Intolerance is run amok and unless we work to quell this plague, we will be facing a new global war. But it will not just be a war of religion so much, as a war of the 21st versus the 7th Centuries; between an intolerant God who instructs his followers to exact judgment on the world, according to their narrow views and a tolerant God who offers man the freedom to accept or reject such criticism. What I find most troubling however, is that they want to hold the respective governments, of where the cartoons were published, responsible for the contents of its’ free press. They want to do what they cannot do through intimidation and censor one of the greatest hallmarks of a democratic society: a free press. Their demands and actions are beyond unreasonable and deserve nothing but the strongest condemnation and represent nothing more than intolerance of the highest order.

As extreme as some of the above might seem, I see little difference between supporters of creationism or censorship and those who support laws that discriminate against positive people and gays. A tolerant society cannot codify discrimination into law without sufficient cause and the fact that you might be uncomfortable with the fact that I happen to be gay, just does not qualify as a persuasive argument for formulating laws to restrict my rights. Nor is your fear of HIV or you misguided attempt to control women’s reproductive rights.

The reason that I keep referencing both abortion and gay themes is that while there are thousands of other equally important issues regarding intolerance, these two seem to have garnered the most interest in the past few years. Both issues reek of sexism and they represent the height of intolerance, from their detractors, who have decided that they possess the moral authority to tell others how to live. I find it loathsome that the GOP would use such issues to divide this great nation, but what are most disconcerting are their proponents claiming to have some divine authority to promote such intolerance towards all of these groups. If we are to believe that we are a tolerant society, then we cannot tolerate intolerance, because it will surely destroy us.

But where some of them really lose me, is in regards to the laws that cover gray areas, such as not treating gay patients. Now what? Do they have a gay detector? What constitutes being gay? What about bisexuals (will they only treat them half the time)? Will I have to carry a gay card? Maybe a pink triangle on my forehead would serve the same purpose… it worked for Hitler. You may think I am being overly dramatic, but look around the world. I’ll admit this country is much safer than others, some of which even kill their citizens for being gay; however thinking like this is exactly how the Holocaust started.

It’s not such a stretch to first legislate more discrimination against gays and other groups, as that is how you promote a strategy of intolerance. Think Japanese detention camps during WWII or anything Arab or Muslim after 9/11. Because once you “de-humanize” a segment of society, it becomes even easier to plot their total demise. I know for a fact that there are tens of millions of Americans who would have no problem in legislating positive people and gays as second-class citizens, because they have already shown that propensity by passing both excessively harsh and unnecessary HIV transmission laws and anti-gay laws in many states in just the past two years. But laws are not the only ways to promote intolerance. I defy you to explain the difference in unneeded laws for HIV transmission versus insufficient funding for HIV services and treatments. They both have the same effect; the suppression of a minority segment of society. They both reek of intolerance and they both ruin lives.

It’s time for us to call these people out and expose their goals for what they represent: pure and unadulterated hatred. Forget being PC, the gloves are off. Unless you have been living in a cave, you surely know that there are people, who would just as soon legislate numerous groups out of existence and only we can change this trend. It’s not such a stretch to imagine Muslim detention camps, pink triangles, HIV colonies, censored or monitored speech and women have already endured decades of “back room” abortions. We can’t allow these zealots to continue breeding their intolerance and a way to do that, is by removing their cloaks of lies and spotlighting the true agenda behind these hateful ideas and laws.

Our fight against intolerance must encompass all segments of society, because many of the disenfranchised citizens in our society are the targets of these campaigns. Time has come for each of us, to confront intolerance, in whatever form, wherever we find it. For too many of us, that old comfort of “it does not involve me” isn’t true anymore. The abortion issue alone impacts one half of our species and for anyone to suggest that women not have access to all medical options, is just inconceivable. If you don’t agree with abortion, then have nothing to do with it, or seek change honestly, openly and with compassion, not through dogma, force or intimidation.

I also find it interesting that those most opposed to abortion, are generally the last in line to adopt these “unwanted” children and most are nowhere to be found when adopting special-needs or HIV infected children, yet they condone forbidding gays to adopt children. In Florida alone, we have 5,200 children awaiting adoption, but lack the required foster homes and the law forbids the hundreds of deserving gay families from adopting these children into a loving home.

I’m adopted and I always thought the goal of adoption was to provide a loving environment for children and I don’t see how the love expressed by a gay couple is any different from that expressed by an unwed or married heterosexual couple. Apparently millions disagree and find homosexuality to be so loathsome that they would rather these children languish, often for years, in foster homes, or worse, on the streets. All of this simply so gays can’t adopt, very Christian like attitude indeed, when gays are not even mentioned in the Bible, so what’s the excuse for this intolerance?

I don’t even know how to respond to those who would create laws to strip gays of their rights. I don’t know why you are so afraid, but you have yet to show me anything that does not reek of hate and loathing. What exactly did we do to make you hate us so much? And please stop insulting my intelligence, by telling me that you are not promoting hate, but protecting some unreasonable dogma that you take as a divine right. No matter which religion, they all keep claiming that they don’t promote hate, so I ask again, what’s the basis of this intolerance? If your religion doesn’t support it, then it must be your own unbridled hatred towards gays. You can’t have it both ways, either your God says to do it, or you do, so which is it?

Gays are not condemned in the bible, so where does the Pope get off, arbitrarily excluding gay priests now, when they have been fine for decades, probably for centuries? Can you say scapegoat for HETEROSEXUAL priests’ sex abuse scandals? Just how stupid and gullible does the Pope think people are? Apparently millions are, as they accept this lie as the reason that hundreds, probably more like thousands, of heterosexual priests abused young boys. I have a news flash for them: GAY MEN DO NOT WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN; PEDOPHILES DO. Let’s just forget the fact that the almost all pedophiles are heterosexual, no, this just serves to put yet another nail in the “we told you those gays were dangerous” coffin. Leave it to the Vatican to never miss an opportunity to condemn gays for sins we have never committed. (I'm sure I remember Jesus preaching about us not judging others and the sin of pride, but Benedict must have missed class that day).

Have all of our wits and logic left us?

Our Tim, spoke at length in his Blog about the need for personal responsibility and while I wholly support that notion, I fear that we must now take some responsibility for the hatred and intolerance that is espoused by our religious leaders and elected officials. No longer can we allow these people to hide behind their facades and each of us must recommit to exposing them and their hateful intentions. Call them out, force meaningful dialogue and insist that they present their views in a fair and TRUTHFUL fashion. Make them realize that we will no longer support anyone who espouses hatred toward any segment of society. Remain focused not only on their message but their methods in shaping public perceptions.

Intolerance exists at all levels of our society and since perceptions are formed one person at a time, you have to confront intolerance in the same fashion. A single person promoting intolerance is no different that a leader doing the same, just a difference in order of magnitude. We can affect change and so it becomes imperative that we confront intolerance in our daily lives, our friends and families and our religious and legislative representatives.

All this backstabbing and camouflaging, the true hatred of certain individuals and groups and their intolerant proposals must end. I urge everyone to become active in confronting intolerance. Whether in the halls of Congress, in the streets and especially in your home, intolerance is a societal cancer that must be excised. The gloves are off because whether you realize it or not, we are in a fight to the death and if we are too complacent, that death may well be ours.