Comments on: We’re so angry we could tweet

By: John in Seattle

John in Seattle — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:39:49 +0000

I agree John, it is very humiliating to watch voters go to the polls and vote on my life. In Washington it was a double edged sword, on the one hand the people voted to approve Ref 71, and on the other hand we voted ourselves separate not equal. I am a huge fan and friend of Dan Savage and I beleive his thinking is on the right track. We must lobby, we must conduct civil disobediance where possible and we must shame our neighbors who don’t support equality.

Besides getting arrested is not a big deal, i’ve been arrested twice. Posession of a illegal substance and drunk in public (in New Orleans, go figure). Oh I am reading a interesting book by Max Blumenthal called Republican Gommorah which is quite eye opening. I saw Max on Charlie Rose discussing the book, fascinating, background on how the Republican party has swung so far right.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:39:20 +0000

I could be wrong, but I don’t think the U.S. citizens would be able to arrange a Constitutional amendment. Isn’t that something that has to go through the legislature? In it’s current condition, I don’t think Congress could pass a constitutional amendment declaring the sky blue.

I feel the gay marriage case that eventually hits the Supreme Court will go down in history much like Roe. vs. Wade. It will allow an important right to a group of people, but will be constantly under fire.

By: Wutzke

Wutzke — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:03:56 +0000

Frankly, that’s exactly what I fear – taking this topic to the U.S. Supreme Court. I do not see any strong *federal* arguments that would make a majority of the justices vote to impose gay marriage on the states – in fact, in similar cases the justices have often looked to state legislators and voter sentiment to decide whether something has risen to the level of being protected as a constitutional right (e.g., death penalty, interracial marriage, execution of mentally retarded criminals) – and here, we have 31 state referenda and I don’t know how many legislative votes against gay marriage, versus basically 4 pro-gay marriage legislative votes (one of them repealed by the voters [Maine] and another vetoed by a governor [California]).

Because even if the U.S. Supreme Court were to rule in favor of gay marriage, I’m confident that that would so enrage and embolden the (ironically named) tea-baggers that we’d see an amazingly strong push for a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. And *that* would be a disaster.

By: Michael

Michael — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:29:01 +0000

Honestly, I’m not all that angry about the Maine vote. I mean, I’m not thrilled, but I can’t really get up in arms about something that will eventually come down to one thing, a Supreme Court decision.

For my part, I feel the anti-gay marriage lobby is afraid of taking this to the Supreme Court. I think that’s why we’re dealing with election season after election season with new referendums for and against gay marriage. In the end, they are all useless when the Supreme Court (FINALLY) convenes on this issue.

What I am tired of is a gay community that is so believing in the Democratic party being the ultimate deliverers of equal rights. Women got the right to vote at a time when there were no women in Congress. Blacks were freed by a congress void of African Americans. Gays have this silly notion that if we elect more gay people, that will change the laws.

Furthermore, I am saddened that we, as a country, have been unable to save the Republican Party from the Conservative Christian movement. I hoped part of the change that was promised by Obama’s election was a rescued GOP. Instead, it has been entrenched in the same failed rhetoric. Worse yet, the Democratic party has made itself vulnerable to their attacks once again.

The entire political process is failing our country, and I have little time for anyone who continues to buy into the sad us vs. them mentality that comes with it. Still, I remain optimistic about the future of the gay rights fight, and I believe that every state that rules on gay marriage, whether it is for or against, is another step towards victory.

By: KLT

KLT — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 20:49:42 +0000

John, after reading this post, and the good point you mentioned on Sciguy about the ‘wedge strategy’ in regards to science and public policy, I wanted to make a response as a Christian. I have a very strong sense of justice and it always bothers me when Christians use their beliefs to try to ‘force’ others to accept Christian principles when God himself does not do that.
A good example of the hypocrisy of this in action is when Christians (whose entire theology is supposed to be based on the concept of love of God and neighbor) harass and persecute other Christians of different denominations.

You might not be aware of this, but Jehovah’s Witnesses, (who are Christians), were also refused the legal right of marriage in some countries, such as Greece, and even denied burial rights for many years on account of the strong influence the Church had on the government & public policy. We’ve been fighting legal battles for decades on all kinds of freedoms which have been denied to us, and our members have been viciously attacked by other Christians for our refusal to participate in ‘the standard’ or widely accepted church doctrines of whatever the dominant religion of the land is.

But this is very important to remember…Don’t forget that a true Christian (who truly lives by the principles that Christianity was founded on), will not interfere with public policy or hold public office. In fact, the original Christians of the 1st century never held public office or got involved with politics at all. Our job is to teach and instruct those who are favorably disposed, but never force anyone to convert to our views. Both the secular historical record and the Biblical account is very clear on that point.
Even Jesus himself refused to have any involvement in politics by actually turning down the attempted effort of his Jewish countrymen to place him in public office…as mentioned in the following verses:
“Hence when the men saw the signs he performed, they began to say: “This is for a certainty the prophet that was to come into the world.” Therefore Jesus, knowing they were about to come and seize him to make him king, withdrew…” (John 6:14, 15)

So a Christian who is being ‘true to form’ should never try to force a conversion or force acceptance of Christian principles, and especially not by attempting to interfere with the laws of the land in order to do so. The Bible makes it very clear that God doesn’t want people to obey him out of fear or force,…but rather, out of heartfelt love, and a desire to please him. But even so, he has given humans the gift of ‘free will’ to chose for themselves. So when other humans interfere with that right, they are actually acting against God’s will, not in harmony with it. Anyone who claims to be a Christian should be aware of that fact. If not, they are presumptuously acting on their own personal & political motives and agenda…not God’s.