Posts
The parliament of Spain legalized gay marriage in this staunchly Catholic nation. While adamently opposed by Catholics and conservatives in the country, the bill is just the latest of many progressive initiatives pursuied by the ruling Socialist-majority government of Prime Minister Zapetero.
In my home state of Maine, however, the conservative Xians, led by Michael Heath and other Jesus-lovers, have just turned in the required signatures to put a "people's veto" on the ballot in the fall. This will be the third time this divisive issue has been thrust in the faces of Mainers since 1997. It's bound to get ugly here in the Pine Tree State, as the out-of-state morality policy such as James Dobson's Family Research Council and others are already descending on the state, as well as fattening the coffers of the anti-gay proponents.
Interestingly, our governor John Baldacci had signed into law a bill granting legal protection to gays and lesbians, allowing Maine to join the rest of the New England states that have similar forms of legislation.
While Maine certainly has a progressive element, as well as those who go by the declaration of live-and-let-live, the anti-homosexual crowd will whip up the fears of others and this one could get extremely ugly come the fall. FMI about how you can join those who would like Maine to leave the 16th and join the 21st century, a good place to start is with Maine Won't Descriminate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I went to the Jesus lovers website but I didn't feel much love coming through. They are evil people! I love that picture of God faring Michael praying with his hands together. I believe he should say some prayers for himself to show compassion on all mankind (and women kind). I don't know where his hatred of gays is coming from!!?? The scary part is that he is brainwashing all of his followers.
I'm not sure if I'd use "evil" as a term of endearment, but they certainly are people that don't have much tolerance for others.
It amazes me how they can take the example of Jesus, at least revealed in places like the gospels, and end up with organizations like the CCL of ME, Focus on the Family (James Dobson) and some of the other groups.
If the referendum is defeated and gay rights legislation is left to stand, you know that Heath will once again go the referendum route.
In your view, it seems that the only "rights" that you are concerned about are those of the liberal choir that frequents your site. What about the "rights" of Michael Heath and others who don't want gay rights? I guess their rights don't count because they're not a liberal like you and your friends!
There are plenty of people in Maine (and other places) who don't think "special" rights for gays is a good thing; we have a "right" to our opinion, even if liberals like you don't think we do.
Let me first say that I don't self-identify as a liberal. I consider myself a left-libertarian and I deplore much of what liberalism has come to stand for.
With that said, you resort to a common position taken by people like yourself (I'm assuming you are a Xian, or if not, at least self-identify as a member of the conservative camp); you see yourself as a persecuted member of a minority, when in fact, I'd make the case that you are the dominant cultural force in the U.S.
Nearly three years ago, while still a member of an evangelical congregation, I began wrestling with the issue of gay rights. Was the theology of the Bible truly opposed to homosexuality and lesbianism? A book by Walter Wink, Homosexuality and Christian Faith; Questions of Conscience for the Churches helped me to see that the Bible doesn't condemn gays and their lifestyles.
Here is a link that you might find interesting;
http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_bibl.htm
Personally, I no longer understand why so-called Xians freak out about monogamous homosexuals who choose to validate their love by getting married.
Am I missing something?
Let me end by saying that I no longer hold to an orthodox view of Xianity, but if I did, I think that I'd be open to a more tolerant view of gay marriage than so many currently embrace.
I find it interesting how the gay rights protections the governor signed into law and that we now are going to referendum on, always end up centering on marriage between gays.
Michael Heath and his legion of hate do a great job of hijacking the agenda and focusing it on marriage, rather than the issue of discrimination that the law is intended to prevent. I've even allowed myself to be pulled into the gay-marriage debate. With that said, here's my final piece on the post and the associated comments.
While my libertarian friends might disagree that the state can actually sanction marriage, the biggest issue I think comes down to extending rights and benefits to those couples who ought to receive them.
If the state recognizes only Judeo-Christian views of marriage--that of "one man and one woman", then what about common-law, gay and other forms of marriage? Isn't the state then sanctioning a religious view of an institution (that being marriage)?
As Chef Dunn wrote of which I concur, whether or not gays ultimately acquire the right to marry does nothing to affect my standing in the eyes of the state.
This entire issue is another case of those on the religious right making sure that their agenda receives the full protection of the law.
Post a Comment