JMohegan
.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2006
- Posts
- 8,226
Yes.any thoughts?
You should go see The Book of Mormon, as soon as you possibly can. It is totally fucking hilarious and sheer genius, truly.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Yes.any thoughts?
Thank you.If secretly gay-friendly churchgoers really did exist en masse here in the U.S., then equal treatment in marriage, adoption, the boy scouts, and every other damn thing would have become a reality a long time ago.
Why? Because, even though you may tolerate bigoted messaging while enjoying all that fellowship and free babysitting on Sundays (telling yourself that your tolerance for said bigotry really doesn't hurt anything)... still, we don't vote in this country on Sundays.
So let's dispense with that ridiculous notion.
Republicans may begin to support gay marriage in full force, Huckabee said, “And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk.”
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/huckabee_evangelicals_may_walk_over_gay_marriage/
Thank you.
If secretly gay-friendly churchgoers really did exist en masse here in the U.S., then equal treatment in marriage, adoption, the boy scouts, and every other damn thing would have become a reality a long time ago.
Why? Because, even though you may tolerate bigoted messaging while enjoying all that fellowship and free babysitting on Sundays (telling yourself that your tolerance for said bigotry really doesn't hurt anything)... still, we don't vote in this country on Sundays.
So let's dispense with that ridiculous notion.
Republicans may begin to support gay marriage in full force, Huckabee said, “And if they do, they’re going to lose a large part of their base because evangelicals will take a walk.”
http://www.salon.com/2013/03/27/huckabee_evangelicals_may_walk_over_gay_marriage/
You can gain a clue about how vociferously GLBT civil rights are being opposed in the USA by the tone of these posts...May I ask a question about the US here - please don't bite my head off because I genuinely don't know about this and would like to know the answer. And if it shouldn't be on this thread, then apologies again.
Gay marriage is not currently legal in the US but is being proposed, same as here in the UK? There is no doubt that it will go through here - is there more opposition where you are? Do you not have legislation that prevents discrimination against gay couples who want to adopt, or that protects against discrimination in the workplace?
Equality on the grounds of sexual orientation, ethnicity etc is fully supported and backed by the law over here, as it should be. It sounds like you're still battling?
You can gain a clue about how vociferously GLBT civil rights are being opposed in the USA by the tone of these posts...
We have lots of legislation that encourages discrimination against gays in the workplace and in our private lives, and all of it, Lally-my-love, every stitch of it is fueled by believers in God.
*sigh*
We are told to be proud of our seperation of church and state-- but all that really means is that churches don't pay taxes.
Given the (supposed) close ties between the UK and US, I didn't realise there was such a huge cultural difference in this regard. Equality for all is such a basic precept of our society which is taken as read (being enshrined in our human rights legislation), that it had been puzzling for me to try to figure out some of the posts in this thread
Discrimination still exists of course - we're still not a perfect society by any means, but if caught, the perpetrators of any type of discrimination are held very much accountable for their actions.
None of the religions have any political power over here, and the percentage of religious followers is so small that none of the political parties can be swayed by any religious thinking. Again, your situation is obviously much different if your legislation can be dictated in this way.
No political power? Church of England bishops get seats in the House of Lords, do they not? A couple dozen Lords Spiritual, or something like that?
How the heck is that "no political power"?
On a related note...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...rowing-Lords-rebellion-over-gay-marriage.html
Apparently true for the Church of England as well.Here, it also means they get a special exemption on anti-discrimination employment laws :-/
My apologies. I misunderstood your assertion about "no political power."There are 650 seats in the House of Lords of which the bishops occupy 26. Hardly a vote swaying majority for the lords spiritual.
And if I wanted a balanced opinion on any political question, the telegraph wouldn't be my first choice.
My point was directed at the post that said that US politicians were swayed by the opinion of the church going electorate. That s simply not the case in the UK.
My apologies. I misunderstood your assertion about "no political power."
That was a news, not an opinion, piece. But of course, news organizations can & do reflect bias. What is your "first choice" for UK news reporting?
US politicians are not a monolithic bunch. There are districts in which the electorate is heavily church-going evangelical, and those politicians reflect the church-influenced, socially conservative, perspectives of their voters. But there are other districts in which the electorate is far more progressive.
Here, it also means they get a special exemption on anti-discrimination employment laws :-/
yes, that too-- and doctors, hospitals, even pharmacists, are allowed to refuse women their contraceptive needs if the providor's church says it's immoral.
As in every state, residents of Kentucky already enjoy religious liberty under the First Amendment, but conservatives in the state legislature decided to craft a proposal that would empower Kentuckians with "sincerely held" religious beliefs to disregard state laws and regulations. In effect, if a law conflicted with the tenets of your faith as you interpret them, your conscience would trump your obligation to follow the law.
This wouldn't mean folks could just run red lights and tell the police their "sincerely held" beliefs trump traffic lights -- the legislation has a few safeguards, though critics argue they're overly vague -- but as my friend Rob Boston at Americans United for Separation of Church and State recently explained, the Kentucky proposal could carry widespread consequences.
"What are some of the things that could happen if this bill becomes law? A pharmacist could refuse to provide Plan B drugs to a rape victim. The owner of an apartment building could refuse to rent to an unmarried couple. A woman who gets pregnant out of wedlock could be summarily fired from her job. The measure would also largely nullify protections for gays and lesbians that a handful of Kentucky communities have passed.
In short, the bill could end up elevating the religious beliefs of some people over the civil rights of all."
The bill nevertheless passed the legislature, largely with Republican support, but also with the backing of some conservative Democrats. Kentucky Gov. Steve Beshear (D) then vetoed the measure, citing "serious unintentional consequences that could threaten public safety, health care and individuals' civil rights," and the need to avoid "costly litigation" the state would likely lose.
In response, the legislature overrode the veto this week, and it will become state law in 90 days. Religious right activists who lobbied aggressively for the measure have vowed to "move along with the rest of the country," taking their proposal to other states.
Yeah, if the stakes are that high for you, then it's probably better to clutch those pearls to yourself.when the first reaction to experiences is "well that musta been all in your head"?
whats the difference then.
why would I even attempt such a monumental task of detailing my most treasured qualia and then cast such pearls before a group of people that would have neither appreciation for the sacred nor even respect for a fellow poster?
That reads to me as the politest STFU ever.
Keep your poison rose.
This is precisely why these threads devolve so rapidly though, and why there can be no home for celebration of experience with the divine here. If someone does have some kind of experience which they consider to be divine or even merely supernatural, that experience to them is not an opinion. Recollections of it are and should be precious, but if anyone dares post such here their experience is assumed to be an arguable point; they are ganged up on, the poster's intelligence is frequently insulted, and their 'treasured pearls' are picked apart by jackals.
"but this is the internet" is hardly an excuse for such an insular board. When the same handful of screen names come up again and again, it's those people who decide what the atmosphere here will be like. Calling yourselves a minority here (as several of you often do) does not make it so, nor does it give you any moral high ground in mobbing up for a cyber lynching.
christianity can go fuck itself. More imporantly, as you imply, it can take care of itself. I'm not talking about christianity. I'm talking about the very personal testaments of one person at a time, whatever their faith may be.
aren't you?
I didn't ask you to. Simple respectfulness does not require bowing.
Maybe I am in the minority, but I have known just as many Athiests/Agnostics who think non-hetero sex/relationships/identities are wrong because its just "gross" and/or wrong when measured against their sensibilities as I have God believers who are completley cool with people just being who they are.
It just seems to me that religious freedom can only be secured with tolerance and compassion for differences and not a demand for a concensus about what is universally "right" or "wrong". Nature itself a lesson in the power of diversity when it comes to survival and sustainability, isn't it?
All that heaviness aside, for me personally, I confess that I think sexualizing religious rituals, rules, and overall concepts of omnipotent power can definitely be hawt.
I can see this needs clarification, as there are so many minorities among us.
So if it weren't obvious before, the "minority" i'm talking about here is religious bullies of any persuasion. "But we're minorities," is an argument i remember hearing from religious bullies all the time, especially here. Five wolves in a room with a sheep are not a minority, no matter how many sheep are just outside, or for that matter, standing aside in the same damn room.