Jan 202010
 

Well – Judge Walker wormed around the 9th Circuit decision against forcing the release of internal campaign documents and guess what?

The Catholic and Mormon Church’s role was put on the stand. Worse – Religion was put on the stand.

Read this incredibly biased AP article about the trial and notice how they downplay the fact that the Speaker of the California Assembly is gay in an effort to lend their news organization as an assistant to the plantiffs. (no on 8 )

The concept that Gays are an oppressed minority is absurd. The article’s title – Professor says Gays are Politically Unpopular – basically says we need to overturn prop 8 with a court because 34 of 35 gay marriage initiatives have failed at the ballot box.

Thanks to Judge Walker – the No on 8 crowd will have a much easier time winning as they will know the strategy used by Yes on 8.

Most troubling is this excerpt from Andy Pugno summarizing today’s installment of absurdity:

Today, the legal challenge to Prop. 8 took an ugly turn as religion itself was put on trial. Plaintiffs’ witness Gary Segura, a Stanford University political science professor with expertise in the area of the political power of minorities including homosexuals, summed it up when he said “religion is the chief obstacle for gays’ and lesbians’ political progress.”

In trying to make the case that homosexuals are a vulnerable minority with no ability to achieve and secure success in the political system for their interests, Professor Segura blamed hostility, political opposition and even violence towards gays and lesbians on the teachings of major religious denominations. He further testified that there is no more powerful organization in the United States – save the government – than the church. Particular scrutiny was given to the official religious doctrines of the Catholic Church and Southern Baptists about marriage, family and sexual relationships. Therefore, according to his logic, gays and lesbians must be given special legal protection by the U.S. Constitution against religion itself.

So – Prop 8 hurts people’s feelings, overturn the will of the people… when that doesn’t work – smear the Church.

At least the professor is honest about it. (Unlike the AP)

  9 Responses to “Prop 8 Trial Update – Religion Put on Trial”

  1. How did you even read that into it?

    Religious organizations, taking advantage of or utilizing the faith of followers and their money, have actively, not passively, set out to make themselves an obstacle to equal rights for lgbt, and now you complain when someone is observant enough to point this out?

    How do this make sense? Prop 8 played the religious card during the campaign for its passage with its outright lies that churches would be forced to consummate marriages between couples of the same sex. They made religion an obstacle through their own actions, intentionally. You don’t get to pretend that didn’t happen now that it’s inconvenient for you.

  2. Sorry sir – the issue you’re trying to dance around is the homosexual lobby trying to say that the church’s opinion does not matter and that it is less than others and finally that should be cause to invalidate Prop 8.

    What say you to black voters who overwhelmingly voted Yes on 8 (while voting for Obama) – because they are angered that people equate genetics to a sex act?

    Inconvenient – you don’t even hide the fact that you are fighting for your cause and doing so at the expense of religious freedom.

    I do appreciate the transparency.

  3. “The church’s” opinion isn’t the issue. “The church’s” actions are, and currently, as in the past, they’re trying to use freedom of religion to force those with different beliefs and convictions to conform to “the church’s” beliefs and convictions, which is not actual freedom of religion at all.

    What “Church”, might I ask, are you even referring to? There are many churches in the USA. No one against Prop 8 is against this mysterious “the Church”. They’re against the specific actions instigated by specific, largely evangelical groups that may or may not be tied to any specific “church”.

    My religious freedom is at risk here, not those pushing for Prop 8, those who actively try to force everyone else to follow their religious beliefs. Those against Prop 8 want for everyone to be free to follow their own faith. Your faith may be against allowing marriage for couples of the same-sex, mine does not. Yet you will codify into law your own beliefs? You will let your beliefs trump mine?

    We in no way want to force you to consummate marriages against your faith. Yet you seek to invalidate in the eyes of the state the marriages we would consummate? How dare you act as if *we* are the ones attacking religious freedom when it is *you* doing so.

  4. Have you been following the proceedings? The arguments your side are making are basically saying that the only way fairness can occur – is to muzzle and cut off the church.

  5. No, they aren’t.

    They’re correctly pointing out that *active participants* have *actively* created obstacles for the freedoms of other people.

    Again, what church are you referring to? Your church? My church? Are the Protect Marriage folks, etc., a church now? What church is being attacked simply for being, rather than for actively engaging in specific activities specifically intended to attack the freedom of religion and other freedoms of individuals who do not share the beliefs of these specific organization?

    They are not, themselves, a “church”. Those involved are organizations taking advantage of the religious faith of the followers of various churches to throw around vague terms like “family values” (what values exactly? certainly not mine) and “attack on the church” or “attack on religions” (again, whose church? whose religion?) so that these followers will hand over their money to power the political agendas of these organizations.

    You aren’t being muzzled for having opinions. You aren’t being cut off. People are rightfully reacting to active attempts to stifle religious freedom, all while you cry oppression as soon as we point this out. Because only your religious freedom matters. Not ours.

    Those affiliated with and supporting the organizations proclaiming to “defend marriage” feel as though only you can sit on throne of judgment, telling the rest of us mortals what is moral and what constitutes moral decay, what makes a good marriage and a good family and what does not. That only you, and you alone, can be correct. That the rest of us are nothing more than “activists” (you aren’t?) or oppressors, when if you’d look inside yourselves for even a moment, you’d realize that the only people doing any oppressing are the ones who have decided that their way, and their way alone, is the correct way, the good way, the moral way, and that their way alone should be the law of the land, for everyone, regardless the religious faith and beliefs of anyone else.

    You are the ones actively attacking religious freedom. But you are so blind that you would rather grab onto every anti-religious sentiment against you, no matter how much hurt *you caused* lies behind it, then realize the log is in your eye, not ours.

  6. Thank you for following this blog – there you have it folks, the no on 8 crowd – as with the 2008 election are actively monitoring blogs.

    The discussion above proves the key assertion of no on 8:

    “religion is the chief obstacle for gays’ and lesbians’ political progress.”

  7. No, religion isn’t.

    People, specifically the “defend marriage” supporters, are the chief obstacle.

    They have chosen to take advantage of religious faith to create obstacles. They have decided that the religious convictions they support are alone worthy of protection, while everyone else is expected to simply roll over and accept that. Because if we fight for their own religious convictions, they cry that we’re persecuting them. To them, it is an impossible concept that both views are valid, that in a free society they should both be free to coexist. Instead, they want to force through only one option: theirs.

    “Religion” isn’t a monolith. There are, surprise surprise, religious gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and their supporters. There is “religion” (the Episcopal Church and United Methodists comes to mind) that is extremely supportive.

    Again, what “religion” are you referring to? That’s an extremely vague term meant to anger a large number of people who identify as religious regardless of whether they are at all involved with the very specific people and groups creating obstacles.

    Religion isn’t the obstacle. The religious bigotry of specific groups and individuals is.

  8. Then get the memo to your legal team – they mounted a frontal assault on religion.

    And ask the legal team what religion they are referring to when they were making their broad arguments.

  9. The church has a sacred contract to protect children from perverted people. Jesus made it clear and I am living proof that having a gay parent is the worst thing a child can go through. I am tired of the gay agenda and in my book I don’t hold back to what trauma it causes children. Children need monogomous parents, one male and one female. Even if gay marriage is pushed on us, it will never, ever be right in the sight of God. Gay marriage will never be sacred to God and children should not be subjected to what my four siblings and I were subjected to. It was and is beyond traumatising. God doesn’t care about gay rights.
    http://www2.xlibris.com/bookstore/bookdisplay.aspx?bookid=56042

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.