Backcourt Violation

It seems that ABC News has teamed up with the Department of Immigration in an attempt to set up a joke for me.  According to a news story, a Mexican national has been granted asylum in the US on the grounds that he would face persecution in Mexico due to the fact that he is gay.  This, of course, sets an incredible precedent, one which will not go unnoticed by our Mexican neighbors.  Ok ABC News, I’ll bite:  That giant swishing sound you hear south of the border.

Without being insensitive to this man’s plight, the question can be asked, is sexual orientation a legitimate grounds for seeking asylum? Is there no place in Mexico where it is ok to be gay? Is there no community akin to our San Fransisco where people can live without an unreasonable amount of danger?

Also let’s not forget, there once was a time where all of the United States was openly anti-gay.  If our gay people had not stuck it out, if they had emmigrated to some other country, we would have lost a lot of culture.  What would America be without Rock Hudson, Broadway, Snagglepuss, and Aquaman? Can we really allow Mexico to be divested of such culture?

And if a nation can be tagged as engaging in cultural persecution for which people can be granted asylum, then WTF??? Can all the women in Mexico be granted asylum because Mexico is misogynistic? And if all the gay and female Mexicans are brought over here there will be no one left over there but a bunch of men, and wouldn’t THAT be kind of gay??? Hmmmm deep!

I think my point in all this is that the overriding standard on deciding who should be allowed to be here and who should not should be the issue of value, not need.  The good people of Houston Texas opened their arms up to the Katrina participants based on need.  What did they get for their troubles? A crime wave. I think when inviting the huddled masses we, at the very least, have the responsibility to be sure that those in the huddle are calling a legal play.

This brings me to my ultimate point, the tying in of all these ideas.  If need is to be used as a predominant factor in granting immigration status and if sexual orientation counts as a factor in that need, then what is to prevent the infamous Frito Bandito from just pretending to be gay so he can come to the US and start a crime wave? Didn’t anyone in the immigration courts think about that??? Huh?? Huh???

15 Responses to “Backcourt Violation”

  1. Phelps says:

    There is sure as hell a place for queers in Mexico. There was a gay couple making out on pretty much every block of the zona rosa while I was there. You don’t even see that many gays playing tonsil hockey on Semen Springs in Dallas.

  2. mexi says:

    How can the court not have heard of that place? Or that Mexican guy, for that matter.

  3. R says:

    Uh, and I read that Mexico City just legalized gay marriages a few months ago.

  4. HMt says:

    gay tacos… man, I thought I’d never see the day.

  5. Is that really the Frito Bandito or is that you in drag in a disguise?

  6. mexi says:

    That’s a photo of the actual Frito Bandito. I found it on Google images.

  7. OK. But he sure looks like a fag from Semen Springs, Texas to me.

  8. I can see it now, some dude sitting at the immigration office with his wife and 6 kids asking for asylum on the basis that he is homosexual

  9. mexi says:

    That makes for one funny SNL skit.

    Too bad we don’t write for those guys.

  10. faye says:

    I wonder what will be placed on the list of gay requirements for entry? Of course it’s perfect timing to put our “gaydar” to use.

  11. Hey! I need a reality check on my blog. Can\will you do it? I will be grateful.

  12. “The Twilight Zone: The Obsolete Man…”

    C’mon. Sombody surely will give me a comment.

    What’s the Internet for?…

  13. Nevermind/fuck-it…now I sound like Phelps-on-alcohol the other night.

    I detest this state of mind.

  14. Phelps says:

    CQ, I can tell you, sight unseen, that your post doesn’t know from reality.

Leave a Response