The startling and horrible attack on Mumbai this week reminded us again that there are people in this world who regularly seek to imprint their religion on the rest of us – and they are willing to use bullets and bombs when all else fails.
But how is that different from those that propagated Prop. 8 this year here in California? Whether you use the ballot box or a bomb, if your intention is to make YOUR religious beliefs the rule of law, then the means by which you achieve that is immaterial. The mindset behind the attack on Mumbai is not much different from the beliefs that underlie Prop. 8.
And no, this has nothing to do with freedom of religion. What if one church believes that gay marriage is OK, and another one doesn’t? Does the latter church have the right to tell the other church what to do? Prop. 8 is all about that, isn’t it?
It is un-American to try to force your religious beliefs on the rest of us. That is what brought the Pilgrims to our Eastern shores in the first place. The attack on Mumbai was horrible to watch – but the affects of Prop. 8 are the same – hopes dashed, lives ruined, families rent asunder. We can only hope that the courts will overturn the abomination that is Prop. 8.
One of my blog colleagues, Vern Nelson, recently wrote a post indicating that over 60% of Americans do not have a favorable view of the GOP. And guess which party was behind Prop. 8? Do they not understand that the politics of hate are not cool? That using the government to advance religious ideology is not going to play with most Americans? The GOP is doomed because it is in our nature to love and embrace freedom. Similarly, I don’t think the Taliban will prevail on the global stage. The people of India will never again let their guard down. Nor should we.
Art,
Do you believe that it’s possible to be atheist or agnostic AND still have been in favor of Prop 8?
If you answer yes to that, then your “Talibani” analogy really falls apart.
Anon,
Just as someone who cares about logic, I think you just threw out a real red herring.
A large powerful group bankrolls a measure that they consider to be in their interest for one reason or another; then just because someone who’s not part of that group agrees and goes along doesn’t mean that the large powerful group didn’t bankroll it. And benefit from it somehow (in their minds, or materially)
You’ll find all kinds of people supporting all kinds of crazy things in this big wild world, there were even gays who backed Prop 8.
With your logic, slavery wasn’t racist because some house negros didn’t mind it much.
I expect better of you, special “anon.”
Are you saying Prop 8 would have had a snowball’s chance in hell of passing, without the fervent backing of the Mormon hierarchy, the Catholic hierarchy, and misceallaneous “Talibani” as Art calls them? Seems like you’re trying to say that!
Vern,
All I’m doing is exposing the over-generalization of Art’s analogy. Your statement that even some gays voted for Prop 8 goes to show that reducing these things to such gross, generic characterizations does little to advance the cause of equality.
Vern:
I expect this sort of crazy, illogical, unthinking argument from Art. A reasonable person can oppose Prop. 8 and still object to certifiably-nutso arguments like this post.
So now we are in the taliban if we voted Yes on 8.
Again that includes your wife Art.
Discipline, people. Even if, like Jubal, you think Art’s post is nutty, he did NOT say everyone who voted Yes on 8 was a fundamentalist extremist. That is how he characterized the folks who drove and funded and propagandized for the thing.
I hope the courts overturn this one. In my opinion, Prop 8 was meant to be a wedge issue and not expected to win. But instead it was put out there to drive out a base of voters to vote for other candidates and issues that are in line with the backers of Prop 8.
That’s really what I thought too, Jeff, but… Damned if it didn’t win!
Vern,
Exactly! A lot of good but misguided peiple voted for Prop. 8. My wrath is focused on the Talibani Republicans who wrote this measure, collected signatures, placed it on the ballot and promoted it.
No one has a right to pass laws that effectively promote their religious agenda.
vern, Art,
Propo 8 succeeded because of a determined ground campaign by those who promoted it. A shi*load of money from the Mormon church. And most importantly a three stooges-esque campaign on the No side. I agree with Jeff, that I dont think the promoters of prop H8 thought it was going to win. This is evident by the slim margin by which it won. Good work on pro H8, bad work by No H8, and Brigham Young bringing in the cash. I’m willing to bet that even the Mormons had to do the Scooby Doo double take when they saw the returns.
Excellent post Pedroza!
I wonder what the YES folks would say if a Muslim church, or bhuddist tried to back an unpoular idea? They’s be villified.
But, the real answer was Paul, my imediate preddasessor, NO on 8 LOST it, YES on * did’nt win it.
I liked Arts line of thought. It’s true. I was brought up in the Methodist church but have left due to being gay. I am studying the Wiccan/Pagan ways. I work with a SDA(seventh day adventist) when I had to take him to church I felt like a Black man at a kkk meeting. Remember SDA also sent $$$ to yes on prop 8. The thing that gets me is all ‘christian’ religions are all about the $$. Jesus said the 2 greatest commandments are except me as your savior and Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. He didn’t say only if you are staight. He didn’t say a thing about Gay people. If you follow any other teachings other than Jesus you are a false christian. If you quote the “OLD” testement you are a false christian. Jesus said that he was here to fulfil the old test. I am the way.
If Jesus came back today he wouldn’t be allowed in any church, except maybe MCC… but prob not even there.
Art said: “The mindset behind the attack on Mumbai is not much different from the beliefs that underlie Prop. 8.”
This is the most IDIOTIC thing that I have ever heard you say Art.
junior,
Again you appear to be missing the major point of this post. Both the terrorists in Mumbai and the Prop. 8 advocates are trying to force their religious beliefs on others. The terrorists are using bombs and bullets while Jeff Flint and his cohorts used the ballot box. But in both cases the underlying philosophy is that they want to embed their own religious beliefs into our government.
This nation was founded in part on the belief that we should be tolerant of other religious beliefs. There are churches that support gay marriage. Why should SOME churches have their beliefs enshrined into law at the expense of OTHER churches?
It is un-American to use force or other means to advance religious beliefs, period.
It is much more than religious belief. It is the type of society we want to live in. It is how we believe families should be structured to best provide for stable family relationships.
Religion has little to do with it. However, your attacks on religion will backfire on you.
junior,
At last we arrive at the REAL issue here. I have no problem with religion. But studies show that evangelical Christians divorce more often than their non-religious peers. As for Catholics, they aren’t even supposed to get divorced, but they do, by the thousands.
Can anyone argue that divorce is the most deadly thing of all when it comes to raising families? Divorce shreds family stability! Yet instead of launching a ballot measure against divorce, we end up with a ballot measure against gay marriage. Why is that?
People in this country ought to be free to structure their lives and their families as they please, within the scope of current law. Banning gay marriage does NOTHING to affect most families. It does not save all the children who are embroiled in bitter divorces, does it?
Again, why is it OK for SOME churches to force their own religious beliefs on OTHER churches, via the ballot box or other means? There simply is no justification for this!