Lagging Way Behind Portugal on Gay Marriage

Many religious groups have been fighting vigorously against the passage of legislation that would allow gay marriage in the USA: the Mormons, the Catholics, and several Protestant denominations. The very size of the Catholic church, though, make its objections particularly influential.

Frankly, all these religious objections seem entirely bogus to me. Not all religions have to define marriage the same way. That is what religious freedom means. For example, although people of other faiths can get divorced and then marry other people in their churches, this does not force the Catholic church to perform, recognize or permit these unions for their congregants. Catholics who wish to remarry must do so outside the church.

So, even if gay marriages were recognized by our civil institutions, the Catholic church and all these other faiths could keep right on not defining marriage that way for their own congregants.

In fact, it is a grotesque violation of the separation of church and state for the State to prefer the definitions of marriage of some denominations over others. Many religions already accept a definition of marriage that includes gay unions, so all these faiths are being discriminated against by our government's policy.

The Catholic church is now throwing its weight around again, threatening to stop feeding the homeless over objections to a city provision (in DC)that would allow same sex marriage. Read (and enjoy) Allison Kilkenny's offensive (in a good way) screed about this flap.

Here is a snippet:

The Catholic Archdiocese of Washington said Wednesday that it will be unable to continue the social service programs it runs for the District if the city doesn't change a proposed same-sex marriage law, a threat that could affect tens of thousands of people the church helps with adoption, homelessness and health care.

Yup, that's right. If gay folk can marry, the Catholic church refuses to feed the homeless.

Well, that all seems very reasonable. After all, the state would force the Catholic church to perform gay marriages, and celebrate the beastly unions, right?

Under the bill, headed for a D.C. Council vote next month, religious organizations would not be required to perform or make space available for same-sex weddings. But they would have to obey city laws prohibiting discrimination against gay men and lesbians.

Oh. So this "Please Stop Being An Asshole, You Guys" law is really the thing that has sent the Archdiocese flying off a cliff. The child molestations, and filing sticky-fingered priests from diocese to diocese is all part of God's grand plan, but showing the slightest bit of consideration for gay couples is just too much.

Meanwhile, Portugal (not a city, nor a state, but an entire country, and a Catholic one at that!) is poised to accept gay marriage.

Bravo!

I came across this video at The Daily Dish.

I just wish an American had had the.....um,....guts to do this.

Dumb and Dumbest

This is the dumbest thing I have heard in a while, and I live in a country with the likes of Coulter and Palin.

In Ireland they have just narrowly passed legislation that makes it illegal to blaspheme. They have defined blasphemy as any statement, written or spoken, that offends a substantial number of adherents of any particular religion. The fine for such behavior is 25,000 euros.

Naturally they have a good reason to want to suppress religious hate speech as they try to put their past behind them. But their writing of the law is so vague that it is completely open to question what sorts of speech-----or books!-----would be considered criminal. Would a book of philosophy that includes essays about the existence or nature of God be criminal? What about a book about evolution? Many Christians find that offensive.

The ironic thing here is that they seem to think that they are protecting religions from blasphemers. But really, all religious claims are in effect blasphemous to other traditions. Can a pastor say that only through accepting the sacrifice of Jesus can one attain salvation without offending Muslims, Hindus or Jews? Can priests say that Protestants are doomed to Hell without committing blasphemy according to this new definition? Can anyone in Ireland object to the practice of stoning adulterers (rape victims?) to death without offending Muslim traditionalists?

According to the new law in Ireland, police can forcibly enter your home and confiscate materials (books?) that have 'offensive' material in them.

I see a book burning coming on. I hope they can tap that energy source for cap-and-trade tax benefits, or nothing good will have come of this.

A Helicopter, Pepper Spray, Lesbians,a PA System, Seven Deputies and a Canine Unit, ------This Story Has It All!

(This image is not part of the story, but reflects my take on the goofiness of the excessive police force in this case. This image is actually of Polish riot police-----hey hey hey, no polack jokes!)

A fund-raising party for a Democratic candidate for a Congressional seat in a strongly Republican district in the San Diego area was interrupted by an officer responding to a noise complaint.

When he arrived after 9:00, there was no loud music, no one was using the PA system; (although the candidate says she did use a microphone between 8:00 and 8:30)there were just 30 or 40 elderly people chatting as the event wound down. Nevertheless, the officer decided to issue a citation for a noise disturbance. Interestingly enough, while the candidate was making her pitch, a heckler hidden in the bushes yelled obscenities about democrats and gay people------the hostess of the party and her lesbian partner have one neighbor who disapproves of their relationship.

All the other neighbors say the event was quiet and did not bother them at all.

So why did the officer think that it was appropriate to issue the citation based entirely on the say so of one angry caller who may have just been trying to cause trouble?

When the officer started to issue the citation, and asked the hostess her date of birth, in disbelief she turned to walk away, and the officer grabbed her roughly by the arm.......well, to read about the pepper spray, and the helicopter and the rest, just read the article.

A follow up article also reveals that the people at the party were also getting in trouble for using their cell phone cameras to document the incident.

This will be a story to watch. The local newspaper is reputed to have a republican bias, as does the sheriff's office as well. Read through the comments to the article and you'll get a sense of the local loathing of liberals.

Because of the local politics involved, the victims of the excessive force used in this case are hoping for outside involvement by perhaps the US attorney.

It will be a sad day for democracy when local law enforcement strives to serve the interests of just one political party.

Lies and the Lying Liars About to Lose to Franken!

Of course it may take a bit more time, but a recent court battle has gone Franken's way making him one step closer to his Senate seat.

Former Senator Coleman is widely acknowledged to have lost the election, but is refusing to step aside.(When the first election results seemed to favor him, Coleman told Franken to bow out for the good of the state.) Now his legal challenges seem designed to draw out the controversy as long as possible and deprive the Senate of an additional Democratic senator.

But it's not enough for the Republicans to drag their feet on this matter. They are also lying about Franken and smearing him the entire time with completely unsubstantiated accusations of him "stealing" the election. Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Dick Morris and Ann Coulter have been putting these lies out there for months. But the truth is that the panel in Minnesota that has handled the recounts is anything but left-leaning.

All the usual suspects have echoed these false charges across the airwaves and the Internet. What they invariably neglect to mention is that the Minnesota Canvassing Board, whose decisions have so displeased the Republican right, was impeccably nonpartisan. Nobody in their right mind in Minnesota believes that the board was biased -- and, in fact, Powerline blogger Scott Johnson, no friend of Democrats or Franken, has specifically spoken up to defend it. "There was no noticeable partisan division among the board," he wrote. "Minnesotans are justifiably proud of the transparency and fairness of their work."

Two of its five members are Supreme Court judges appointed by Tim Pawlenty, the state's conservative Republican governor, each with a long record of loyal service to the GOP; a third is a nonpartisan elected judge; a fourth was appointed by former independent Gov. Jesse Ventura; and only one, Secretary of State Mark Ritchie, is a Democrat. At the outset, Coleman's own lawyers accepted the panel's membership, as did everyone else, including Franken, who might have protested that his own party had only one member.

Their decisions against Coleman, which led to Franken's provisional victory by 225 votes, were unanimous. It is this group, composed of distinguished judges with spotless reputations, whose hard work has been described in odious terms by the likes of Morris, Limbaugh and Ann Coulter.

Unfortunately, since Franken is a public figure, he faces major legal obstacles in silencing the lies.

Kill a polar bear, or a thousand, save a penny.

How much would opening up ANWR to oil exploration save hard-working American families? Basically nothing. Nothing. Nothing. But it would make some moola for someone or other, I forget who. Woops, forgive me, I just had a McCain moment. According to the well-known liberal organization, the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, in a study commissioned by that even better-known liberal Ted Stevens (R-Paleozoic), gas will go down by an entire penny/gallon.

From the report:

The recent run-up in the price of crude oil has prompted new calls for the Federal government to increase its petroleum production by allowing exploration and drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) along the northern coast of Alaska. While there is a strong incentive to provide much needed relief to American families who are currently struggling with high gasoline prices, analysis of ANWR’s projected contribution to crude oil markets suggests that relief will be neither substantial nor timely in its effect. Based on Energy Information Administration (EIA) projections of the effect of ANWR on crude oil prices, we estimate that opening up ANWR will reduce gasoline prices by just one cent, starting in 2018.

Both pictures from ANWR, licenced under Wikipedia Creative Commons Licenses.

Much Love to TBogg for the links. All my best to Satchmo.

The US Gov't Hates Contraception and Doesn't Want You to Use It.

Thanks to our friends at Reproductive Health Reality Check, I found out that on Monday, July 14th, the Department of Health and Human Services [proposed regulations to redefine (modified by ed.)] common methods of contraception, such as the pill, the patch, the shot, the ring, the IUD, and emergency contraception, under the classification "abortion."

This is crazy. This is beyond crazy. What this means is that if one more anti-abortion Supreme Court judge is appointed, not only will women not be able to have abortions, but we will not be able to use most forms of birth control. You better hope as hard as you can hope that McCain (who wants to overturn Roe vs. Wade) isn't elected in the fall.

This also means that many more Pharmacists, if the regulations go through, will be able to deny women contraception perscribed by their doctors, should they feel like it. Did you hear about this on the news? Me neither. Someone should be paying attention.

I have a difficult time understanding such rationales. Around 80% of fertilized eggs are naturally aborted. Yeah, only one in five fertilized eggs make it to birth. What happens to those other 4/5ths? Are they really people? Is heaven knee deep in blastomeres?
(Link, above, is from the Bush administration.)

Naomi Wolfe, in only a partial post-jack, explains how to turn America into a facist country, in 10 easy steps.

Cue "Every Sperm is Sacred."


A slightly modified version of this post is now up at feministmormonhousewives.org.

International dispute resolution and bake-off

Billlee in the comments suggested that international disputes should be settled by interpretive dance. I think that there's an existing program that would work even better. A sing-off! All we have to do is expand the Eurovision song contest to include a few more states and raise the stakes just a tiny bit.

The Eurovision Song Contest (French: Concours Eurovision de la Chanson)[1] is an annual competition held among active member countries of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU)....The Contest has been broadcast every year since its inauguration in 1956 and is one of the longest-running television programmes in the world. It is also one of the most-watched non-sporting events in the world.

So, for example, with the oil laws now being negotiated in Iraq between the Gov't and, uh, us (read various oil companies) we just have the main parties (Iraq and the oil companies) have a sing-off! Spangly costumes and back-up dancers required.

The pic's of Lordi, last year's winner. From Finland.

Here's the French entry from last year, just to get us all in the appropriate mood. As a bonus question (prize to be determined later) what animal does the bald lead singer have sewn onto his shoulder? A weasel, perhaps?

My thoughts on the Mormon opposition to gays marrying in CA

As I said elsewhere (but why waste a perfectly good comment)

An unpopular minority - Mormons – trying to limit the rights of another unpopular minority – Gays - on an issue - Marriage - which Mormonism has a somewhat vexed (and very very famous) history, reminds all and sundry about said vexed history, are on the wrong side of history (again – see any number of issues, but perhaps blacks and the priesthood is the closest), hurts the reputation of the church in society at large, does nothing to lessen the distrust of the church felt by the Evangelicals who are the main supporters of the amendment, and is the exact opposite of what the church should be doing.

As to the argument that male-female marriage is "traditional," balderdash. These people mistake there ignorance of history for something akin to fact.

For all of you folks proclaiming that traditional marriage has always been between a man and a woman; right here (for me at least) in the good ol’ U.S. of A, before it was such, for a very very long time (certainly long enough to be called “traditional”) a very wide assortment of native american tribes had (and some still do) “two-spirits.” Basically, these are men who chose to live as women. They could marry, and were considered good luck, or even holy by some tribes. The Navajos, for example saw and still see them as especially gifted at teaching children. So here, in the US, it is not “traditional” for marriage to be between a man and a woman exclusively unless you define traditional to mean “my traditions that I got from somewhere else geographically and haven’t quite forgotten.”

We won’t even get into Hawaiian group marriages.

Soundtrack for post; only one possible.


Pic of Joseph F. Smith, the 7th president of the LDS church with his 6 wives and 45 offspring.

Mormon Church announces formal opposition to Gay Marriage Ruling in CA

So, in solidarity with my Mormon antecedents, I present Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie (AKA "House") discussing how the perfectly decent word "Gay" has been ruthlessly hijacked from our beloved English language.

Congrats Utah! Lamest reason ever to oppose a law in another state.

Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff (and 9 other AGs) has asked California to delay their same-sex ruling because he's afraid people might file law suits over it! Eeek! Not Law Suits! What's an Attorney General to do? Better yet, what's a lawyer to do? Perhaps they could accuse the California Supreme Court of heresy and threaten to poke them with soft cushions.

NOBODY expects the Spanish Inquisition! Our chief weapon is surprise...surprise and fear...fear and surprise.... Our two weapons are fear and surprise...and ruthless efficiency.... Our *three* weapons are fear, surprise, and ruthless efficiency...and an almost fanatical devotion to the Pope.... Our *four*...no... *Amongst* our weapons.... Amongst our weaponry...are such elements as fear, surprise.... I'll come in again.
.......
Ximinez: Now, old lady -- you have one last chance. Confess the heinous sin of heresy, reject the works of the ungodly -- *two* last chances. And you shall be free -- *three* last chances. You have three last chances, the nature of which I have divulged in my previous utterance.
Wilde: I don't know what you're talking about.
Ximinez: Right! If that's the way you want it -- Cardinal! Poke her with the soft cushions!