Rep. Senfronia Thompson : Preach, sister!

[MasterLcZ]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:47am

Although an anti-gay amendment passed in Texas recently, there was some very eloquent and moving testimony against it. This piece from Rep. Senfronia Thompson (D-Houston) is worth reading.

(Yeah, I know...I disagree with her statement that gay rights are not civil rights. I'll forgive her for that)

***********************************************************

I have been a member of this august body for three decades, and today is one of the all-time low points. We are going in the wrong direction, in the direction of hate and fear and discrimination. Members, we all know what this is about; this is the politics of divisiveness at its worst, a wedge issue that is meant to divide.

Members, this issue is a distraction from the real things we need to be working on. At the end of this session, this Legislature, this Leadership will not be able to deliver the people of Texas, fundamental and fair answers to the pressing issues of our day.

Let's look at what this amendment does not do: It does not give one Texas citizen meaningful tax relief. It does not reform or fully fund our education system. It does not restore one child to CHIP, who was cut from health insurance last session. It does not put one dime into raising Texas' Third World access to health care. It does not do one thing to care for or protect one elderly person or one child in this state. In fact, it does not even do anything to protect one marriage.

Members, this bill is about hate and fear and discrimination. I know something about hate and fear and discrimination. When I was a small girl, white folks used to talk about “protecting the institution of marriage” as well. What they meant was if people of my color tried to marry people of Mr. Chisum's color, you'd often find the people of my color hanging from a tree. That's what the white folks did back then to “protect marriage.” Fifty years ago, white folks thought inter-racial marriages were a “threat to the institution of marriage.”

Members, I'm a Christian and a proud Christian. I read the good book, and do my best to live by it. I have never read the verse where it says, “gay people can't marry.” I have never read the verse where it says, “thou shalt discriminate against those not like me.” I have never read the verse where it says, “let's base our public policy on hate and fear and discrimination.” Christianity to me is love and hope and faith and forgiveness-- not hate and discrimination.

I have served in this body a lot of years-- and I have seen a lot of promises broken. I should be up here demanding my 40 acres and a mule because that's another promise you broke. You used a wealthy white minister cloaked in the cloth to ease the stench of that form of discrimination.

So, now that blacks and women can vote, and now that blacks and women have equal rights-- you turn your hatred to homosexuals-- and you still use your misguided reading of the Bible to justify your hatred. You want to pass this ridiculous amendment so you can go home and brag-- brag about what? Declare that you saved the people of Texas from what?

Persons of the same sex cannot get married in this State now. Texas does not now recognize same-sex marriages, civil unions, religious unions, domestic partnerships, contractual arrangements or Christian blessings entered into in this State-- or anywhere else on this planet Earth.

If you want to make your hateful political statements then that is one thing-- the Chisum amendment does real harm. It repeals the contracts that many single people have paid thousands of dollars to purchase to obtain medical powers of attorney, powers of attorney, hospital visitation, joint ownership and support agreements. You have lost your way-- this is obscene.

Today, you are playing to the lowest common denominator-- you are putting aside the real issues of substance that we need to address so that you can instead play on the public's fears and prejudices to deceive and manipulate voters into thinking that we have done something important.

I realize that gay rights are not the same as civil rights-- but I can guarantee you we are going in the wrong direction. I can not hide my skin color. In fact, in most of the South, people as pink as Rep. Wayne Smith were still Black by law if they had a great grandparent who was African. I was unable to attend an integrated and equally funded school until I got my Master of Laws degree. There were separate and unequal facilities for nearly everything.

I got second-hand textbooks even worse than the kind you're trying to pass off on every public school student next year. I had to ride to school on the back of the bus. I had to quench my thirst from filthy coloreds-only drinking fountains. I had to enter restaurants from the kitchen door. I was banned from entering most public accommodations, even from serving on a jury. I had to live with the fear that getting too uppity could get you killed --- or worse. I know what third-class citizenship feels like. In my first term, one of my colleagues walked up and down this aisle muttering about how Nigras should be back in the field picking cotton instead of picking out committees.

So, I have to wonder about Rep. Chisum's 3/5 of a person amendment. Some of you folks hid behind your Bible then, too, to justify your cultural prejudices, your denial of liberty, and your gunpoint robbery of human dignity.

We have worked hard at putting our prejudices against homosexuals in law. We have denied them basic job protections. We have denied them and their children freedom from bullying and harassment at school. We have tried to criminalize their very existence. But, we have also absolved them of all family duties and responsibilities: to care for and support their spouses and children, to count their family's assets in determining public assistance, to obtain health insurance for dependents, to make end-of-life or necessary medical decisions for their life partners--- sometimes even to visit in the hospital, even to defend our own country. And then, we can stand on our two hind legs and proclaim, “See, I told you homosexual families are unstable.” And nearly every one of you on this Floor has a homosexual in their extended families.

Some of you have shunned and isolated these family members. Some of you, even some of the joint coauthors, have embraced them within your own family for the essence of Christianity is love. Yet, you are now poised to constitutionalize discrimination against a particular class of people. I thought we would be debating real issues: education, health care for kids, teacher's health insurance, health care for the elderly, protecting survivors of sexual assault, protecting the pensions of seniors in nursing homes.

I thought we would be debating economic development, property tax relief, protecting seniors pensions and stem cell research, to save lives of Texans who are waiting for a more abundant life. Instead we are wasting this body's time with this political stunt that is nothing more than constitutionalizing discrimination. The prejudices exhibited by members of this body disgust me.

Last week, Republicans used a political wedge issue to pull kids-- sweet little vulnerable kids-- out of the homes of loving parents and put them back in a state orphanage just because those parents are gay. That's disgusting. Today, we are telling homosexuals that just like people of my ilk, when I was a small child; they too are second class citizens.

I have listened to all the arguments. I have listened to all of the crap. Mr. Chisum, is a person who I consider my good friend and revere. But, I want you to know that this amendment is blowing smoke to fuel the hell-fire flames of bigotry.

You are trying to protect your constituents from danger. This amendment is a CYB amendment for you to go home and talk about.

=========

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 11:56am

I love her speech. But I totally disagree about the civil rights issue. To many people, civil rights seems to only refer to the black cause for equality. But gay issues are civil rights issues because what is being denied us now ARE civil rights: spousal/partnership rights, tax advantages, divorce agreements, child-bearing and adoption services...
Not that I'd expect more from Texas, home of big hair and bigger prejudices.

[KelRel]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 12:09pm

WOW! I bet she made some enemies that day! Good for her!

Updated On: 5/10/05 at 12:09 PM

[grownupgroupie]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:03pm

AMEN!

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:10pm

She's brave to stand up there and shout down people who are pretending to interpret God's will for America in enacting laws like this. I say it again - these people miss the point of the true teachings of Jesus and are about as Christ-like as the Philistines.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:20pm

agreed bwaysinger. Jesus hung around the "outcasts" of society all the time. Heck, he even saved an adulteress from being stoned to death (which was the law back then) and let her join in with his other followers. Jesus was all about acceptance and love but a lot of Christians today have completely ignored that and have resorted to seperating themselves from everyone who is not Christian. That is really sad.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:24pm

The problem is they believe Jesus went to them to force them into conversion. He merely gave them a place to be loved. In many ways, they don't really mention these people converting from their ways, although I would imagine they might have.
And again, I always like to point out my favorite Bible passage in which Jesus pretty much states the biggest sinners on the planets are the rich folk what don't part with their money out of selfishness and have no love for their fellow man.
Once again, the very words of Jesus Christ prove he was the biggest hippie socialist of all time.

[spiderdj82]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:27pm

very true.

[TxTwoStep]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 1:57pm

yep, that word "civil" is loaded with irony and complex associations. Many do equate it with the NAACP, and possibly the War Between the States prior to that. But as a root for "civilized" it can be two-edged: how is it "civil" to denigrate a particular sub-group? for some conservatives, they see homosexuality as completely "un-civilized," of course.

i tend to prefer the term "basic" rights. Of course, those with rights often require certain concessions in order to grant the same rights to others...that "with freedom comes responsibility" clause. So it's fine to "liberate" oppressed foreign peoples, as long as the way they then choose to govern themselves supports our own agenda. But our own citizens don't deserve those same "rights" until they too support the agenda that keeps the power where the rightholders prefer it to be.

All that being said, i applaud this rep from Houston. She does have the courage of her convictions, even if we might disagree semantically. The negative stereotypes of Texans, with conservative values and big hair, are often balanced with that "i'll make up my own mind/nearly our own nation" streak that survives here. Ann Richards had it. This woman has it. Long may it thrive.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 2:43pm

It's CIVIL RIGHTS when any group of people is being denied their...civil rights. There is a difference between Civil Rights and civil rights--one is the great movement that covered issues of race. One is the general term for what any group must fight for when denied.

What great words this woman has spoken. There is a growing realization that the Republicans are wasting PRECIOUS time--time that needs to be spent on the pressing issues that she spoke of here.

2006--may very well be a huge wake up call for the GOPs.

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 2:58pm

The problem, Jerby, is that Americans in general need to wake up first. It's slowly happening, I only hope the trend continues.

[robbiej]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 2:58pm

Actually, I think it's an interesting notion, not saying we are seeking 'civil rights'. It's gotten to the point where everyone automatically associates 'civil rights' with the issue of race, so it might be effective to choose something else.

How about 'American rights'. You know...when everyone is like 'I'm an American and proud, dammit!', it might drive home the point that we, as taxpayers and citizens, are being denied access to governmental institutions because of an arbitrary trait that the majority has deemed 'less than'. And if there's anything more un-American than that, I don't know what it is.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 3:01pm

I could def hang with that, robbiej.

Gay American Rights Movement!

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 5/10/05 at 3:01pm

These days, Robbiej, the only Un-American thing you can do is not be a born-again Christian.
Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves.

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:16am

BUMP

This woman's comments are too true and too important to be missed.

[Plum]

Posted: 5/11/05 at 12:25am

The talk about conversion has me thinking about different ways of approaching the Christian mandate to spread that religion. So many people today seem to think that the way to go about it is by browbeating and threatening non-believers. And maybe threats will get a few people to make the switch, but does it really change what they feel at heart?

If I still had my copy of Gorgias around I'd start quoting it now. Basically, there's a difference between persuasion and real conversion, which Plato (quoting Aristotle) stated a whole lot better than I can.