Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson was asked a straightforward question as to whether he thought that the LGBT community was discriminated against. But the party’s candidates are in the tough position of opposing same-sex marriage without wanting to be seen as anti-gay bigots. They seem to think that even conceding a simple fact like the existence of discrimination would make them seem to be too ‘soft’ on gays by their rabid base.
When asked that question by a CNN interviewer, in the process of ducking and weaving to avoid answering directly, Carson responds by turning the question on the interviewer: “What position can a person take who has no animosity toward gay people, but believes in the traditional definition of marriage that would be acceptable?” Watch.
Of course, his question is similar to asking “What position can a person take who has no animosity toward black people, but believes that the races should be kept separate?”
For example, take teacher Karen Fitzgibbons who, in the wake of the Texas swimming pool incident, wrote a Facebook post that has caused her school to begin the process of getting her fired.
She wrote that “the blacks are the ones causing the problems and this ‘racial tension.’ I guess that’s what happens when you flunk out of school and have no education,” according to the Avalanche-Journal.
“I’m almost to the point of wanting them all segregated on one side of town so they can hurt each other and leave the innocent people alone,” she continued. “Maybe the 50s and 60s were really on to something. Now, let the bashing of my true and honest opinion begin….GO! #imnotracist #imsickofthemcausingtrouble #itwasatagedcommunity.”
Does the hashtag #imnotracist and her subsequent statement apologizing and saying that her statement “was not directed at any one person or group” mean that she has no discriminatory intent? According to Carson’s logic, she has no animosity towards black people.
The point is that some positions are ipso facto evidence of discriminatory intent and no amount of disclaimers can get around that.