October 27, 2008

Same sex marriage means religious intolerance, apparently

“This vote on whether we stop the gay-marriage juggernaut in California is Armageddon,” said Charles W. Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries and an eminent evangelical voice, speaking to pastors in a video promoting Proposition 8. “We lose this, we are going to lose in a lot of other ways, including freedom of religion.”

Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative Christian lobby based in Washington, said in an interview, “It’s more important than the presidential election.”

We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation,” said Mr. Perkins, who has made two trips to California in the last six weeks. “But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

Wow. So giving people the freedom to marry the people they love means we'll lose freedom of religion? If it's against your religion, don't marry someone of the same sex. I can't even comprehend the rationale for this one.

And I find it hard to believe that same-sex marriage could have made America fuck up in Iraq, Afghanistan, and New Orleans, more so than Bush's administration.

3 comments:

「舐女」 said...

So, what's more amazing, the bullshit or the sincerity behind it? Unless they know NOTHING about the United States' constitution, they'd have to know that they can't possibly lose freedom of religion, like, ever.

Of course, then they'd also have to know that trying to ban same-sex marriage is slappin' around the religious freedoms of others who DON'T define marriage based on Bible™ (by Michael Crichton). And of COURSE same-sex marriage is fucking things up in Iraq, Afghanistan and New Orleans, how can people possibly get any work done with the knowledge that some people are getting married in some places and they have MATCHING CROTCH-PARTS?!

Mm, all this aside, my favourite pro-prop 8 bits, barring the disgusting "protect our children" is "does not discriminate against 'gays'". Yeah, totally, overlooking that whole "flagrant discrimination in regards to equal rights for marriage" part.

icarus said...

In this Times article, a conservative described "so-called activist judges." I think it's interesting that the conservative movement on this issue is complaining about legal "activism" - yet they are trying to *amend* the state Constitution. Seems kind of activist to me...

Battybattybats said...

Why are they worried about marriage laws and not murder laws?

Because there is nothing in the bible about not allowing others to marry but there is that bit about being obliged to murder witches.

"thou shalt not suffer a witch to live"

That this is murder that they are not allowed to do means basic rights trump their religious objections and have done so for quite some time.

But waht about the bit in the bible about "Do not vex a stranger or oppress him as you were strangers too in the land of Egypt"

Huh fundies? What about that rule? Strange how all the bits of the bible that speak about living in harmony with others who are different to you are ignored by these cherry-picking anti-christian hypocrits who call themselves christian.

Maybe they should read the bible. They should try turning the other cheek in the culture wars then. How about 'render unto ceaser what is ceasers' and support the secular multi cultural multi ethnic multi religious society that ensures their freedom as equal to everyone elses?

And they should shure stop vexing and oppressing strangers thats for sure!