The Douchery of North Carolina

Well, after not having anything really relevant to write about yesterday, we have a outrage double header today. First, as I posted below, the Republican party is hard at work weeding out anyone with half a brain (or ability/desire to govern).  Now, I find out that North Carolina has passed their discriminatory anti-gay marriage amendment.  I am not sure what they call it, but I will tentatively name it the "There is something that I don't understand and therefor it is wrong and protect the family somehow American patriot amendment."   What a load of horseshit. 

Two things.  One: it is totally ridiculous that we can decide by a majority vote what rights people in a minority will have.  Not only is it ridiculous, it is scary; very, very scary.  Clearly, if you are not presently in the majority, you have no rights.  You may have privileges, but no rights.  What you thought were your rights were only the good will (and I use the term loosely) of the majority.

Two: Gays and Lesbians were already (profanity omitted) prohibited to get married by North Carolina law.  This isn't defense of marriage, they are on the offense.  Offense of marriage.  That does sound more like what is going on here.

Anyhow, I will leave you with this little thought...first go here and look at the picture.  Next, go here and watch the video.  Apparently, the golden rule applies in traditional marriage.  /snickers 

I recently read this heartbreaking article from Rolling Stone magazine when my friend posted it on Facebook.  I am not going to discuss it really, I don't think there is much that I can add, it is really gut wrenching stuff.  After reading it, I posted on my friends Facebook link that, "Focus on the Family is pure fucking evil".  I stand by that statement, but I realized that other than attacking to civil rights of homosexuals, I didn't know what Focus on the Family was all about.  So, I popped over to their website.

It truly is an impressive monument to face-palmistry.  Naturally, the first place I went was to the marriage section, hoping for some nice red meat.  I was not disappointed.  Looking over the list I immediately spotted the "sex and intimacy" section.  If you mouse over that link it will bring up a list of topics ranging from "understanding your husbands sexual needs" to "God's design for sex."  The latter goes on to explain that, "For Christians, sex is a big thing because it's a big thing to God."  I am sure that the creator of the universe, the Alpha and Omega, gives a crap about your sex life.  Not only does he give a crap, he probably disapproves.  Notably missing from the sex and intimacy section was anything on understanding your wife's sexual needs. 

Anyhow, like I said, there is a lot to kvetch about over at Focus on the Family.  I could go on, but why spoil your fun.  Check it out.  Warning: you might want to have a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster on hand.

War on religion

I just read this article over at NPR.  The irony burns.  It burns!  Just check out this line:

"I believe the greatest threat to religious liberty is the clash between religious liberty and LGBT rights," [Mathew Staver] says.

Staver says as rights for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people make gains, religious conservatives are having to set aside their convictions. A Christian counselor was penalized for refusing to advise gay couples. A court clerk in New York was told to issue same-sex marriage licenses, despite religious reservations. A wedding photographer was sued for refusing to shoot a same-sex wedding. Staver says these people aren't trying to impose their religious views on others.

"What people of faith don't want to do, however, is be forced to participate in something that literally cuts to the very core of their belief."

What a crock of shit.  I'm sorry, this is not a zero sum game.  There is no law impugning the right to not get abortions, and there is no law impugning the right to not get gay-married.  Grow up people.  

Whoops!

I love the blog Bad Astronomy.  Phil Plait serves up awesome space pictures and videos, as well as pointing out and explaining things scientific that the media either ignores or gets wrong.  Whenever some big science story is breaking, Bad Astronomy is usually my first stop.  Today for example I went there to see if he had chimed in yet on the latest news about the unfortunately nicknamed Higgs Boson (the "god particle").   Sadly, he has not, although, I think that is probably because there has not been enough news yet. 

Anyhow, once I saw that there was nothing new on the Boson there, decided to peruse the other entries.  I came across one about holiday giving.  I was not happy to see this link on the Bad Astronomy page.  Don't get me wrong, I am happy that I know.  I am just upset because I usually drop a few bucks in the Salvation Army's buckets each year while I am shopping.  I hate to think that I have been supporting a charity for most of my life that openly discriminates against gays.  I guess I shouldn't be surprised, and perhaps I had been a bit naive.  At any rate, I will not be dropping any cash into any red buckets this holiday season unless it is part of a drinking game. 

P.S.  Bad Astronomy also has a list of charities that skeptics and atheists would find much more appealing.

Baby factory

Today I read about an article on Project Reason.  I say I read about it because the Wall Street Journal requires a subscription to read some content, and I try to avoid giving News Corp. money whenever I can.  The excerpts I read (one at PR the other at WSJ) suggested that some conservative lawmakers are trying to make the issue of gay marriage an issue of religious freedom.  Anyhow, as I mentioned, I couldn't read the whole article so I can't say too much about it, but it did get me thinking about a couple of things. 

The main thing I started thinking about was the definition of marriage as an institution designed to produce and raise babies.  Let me be clear, if that is what you think marriage is about, or that is what your marriage is about, I am not saying that you are wrong.  That is often a religious point of view, but it doesn't have to be.  I am not criticizing people who think that way.  I am criticizing people who expect other people to think the same way.  Providing a good environment to raise children is a definition of marriage, but it is not the only definition of marriage.  Even if somehow you could go back a hundred thousand years (or so) and prove definitively that the first man and the first woman walking the plains of Africa got married and the only reason for it was so that they could more effectively raise children, to suggest that in modern society we must stick exclusively and strictly to that ancient definition would be asinine.  People get married for many different reasons, and I think it is quite presumptuous to tell any married couple what their relationship is about.  What if they don't want children?  What if they are infertile?  What if they are elderly?  Should we deny the right to marry to them as well?  In this case, it seems strange and dishonest to say that a woman and a sterile man who love each other can get married, but two men or two women who love each other cannot.

I am tired of this subject.  It is a silly waste of time that one day we will look back on and uncomfortably explain to future generations.  *sigh*

Incidentally, I wanted to learn a little more about some Christian ideas about marriage and I found some interesting links, which I have included here:

Biblical Definition of Marriage

Christian Marriage

and an L.A. Times article by a "liberal"

That passage from Romans 13 was especially revealing.  Enjoy!