God, Guns, and Gays
Since I touched on the subject of "moral values" earlier, I thought I might expand my take on it a little. The following is a summary of what I saw as right-wing Christian "values" during the election cycle:
God - Republicans believe their God is the one true God. If you aren't a Christian, you're goin' to hell. If you are a Christian, but don't vote Republican, you're goin' to hell. If you are an elected official and don't shape policy according to the exact text of the King James translation of the Bible, you're goin' to hell.
Guns - Republicans love their guns. By voting for Bush, you could rest assured your right to own assault rifles would never be in jeapordy. Republicans love their guns so much they strive to export guns to the rest of the world (usually with young American men and women attached to them).
Gays - Gays are evil. Homosexuality is a sin (except for the vice-president's daughter, she was granted an indulgence by Pope George II). A gay man in California threatens the moral fabric of the family in Kansas that have never met a gay person. Republicans flocked to the polls November 2nd to ban something that didn't exist.
God - Republicans believe their God is the one true God. If you aren't a Christian, you're goin' to hell. If you are a Christian, but don't vote Republican, you're goin' to hell. If you are an elected official and don't shape policy according to the exact text of the King James translation of the Bible, you're goin' to hell.
Guns - Republicans love their guns. By voting for Bush, you could rest assured your right to own assault rifles would never be in jeapordy. Republicans love their guns so much they strive to export guns to the rest of the world (usually with young American men and women attached to them).
Gays - Gays are evil. Homosexuality is a sin (except for the vice-president's daughter, she was granted an indulgence by Pope George II). A gay man in California threatens the moral fabric of the family in Kansas that have never met a gay person. Republicans flocked to the polls November 2nd to ban something that didn't exist.
posted by CitizenPundit at 5:17 PM
3 Comments:
Once again, thanks for your comment.
I was just on a rant, not a very well-thought-out post, and I realize I went a little overboard.
"legislating from the bench"?....that is a very interesting perspective.
I think the so called "activist judges" from Massachusettes that created this uproar on the right were not legislating. They interpreted the Constitution as saying all men/women are created equal, and deserve equal protection under the law (correct me if I'm wrong). The court did not seek to force religious institutions to accept gay marriage, but for the law to recognize it.
The institution of marriage has both civil and religious connotations. "Traditional" marraige carries with it certain protections under the law, the court allowed that two people, upon entering into a lifelong committment, and agreeing to share property should be allowed this protection. Gay or not, they should be equal under the law.
Most of the "defense of marraige" initiatives that were approved also outlawed civil unions. How is that fair?
Don't get me wrong here, I'm not a gay rights activist. I just think people should be treated equally, even if they're different. If Republicans proposed doing away with all benefits and protections for married people, and left it as a purely religious rite, I could understand the logic. The government would never force a church to change their policies toward traditional marraige.
On a side note about "legislating from the bench", how do you feel about the big hullaballoo surrounding Sen. Arlen Specter? Isn't that the right-wing saying it wants judges that will advance their political agenda?
Why do you think liberals would say "the sky is pink"?...pink...what, are you going off on the gay thing again?
Post a Comment
<< Home