That was an enlightening response Jeffro, and made me think about things I never considered before. Thank you. A “funny” aside from my standpoint is that I have sometimes wished I were religious, (I lean between agnostic and atheist in case you were unaware—I just don’t friggin know) and could somehow accept that fairytale, and then I would not have to think about things but just accept things as I was told to believe. It would seem like such a relief. But my brain just cannot accept religious dogma so I am as I am, and that’s all that I am, and I am not Popeye the sailor man. (I’m sorry, sometimes I just cannot help myself.)
Thank you Ken (you forgot the
toot toot at the end of the Popeye quote - it's okay, I heard it in my head
) I was sort of raised Catholic. Mom was, Dad wasn't and it wasn't until I was 12 years old that Mom started taking us to church. I was put on a fast track: baptized, confirmed and first communion all within a year. It may have been too late for me as I was always an independent thinker. While I tried to embrace the positives, I found way too many inconsistencies. By 16, I was frequently confronting Mom with something the priest had said and she would state emphatically that he did not (Yeah, Mom, I couldn't believe it either!
. What is very telling, is the Sunday after I came out, Mom stopped waking me for mass.
I have settled into atheism. I did the agnostic thing for awhile in my 20's but it was too much like a spiritual insurance policy. If I'm wrong, I go to hell, I'm taking personal responsibility. Ironically (or not) it has been the silent respect that has allowed for a dominance of religion in this Country that has driven me to a more definitive non-belief. I am not alone.
Ahem: Getting back to the topic…..Indeed, not sinning by not acting on it. How fu….absurd. I too am always perplexed by how some religious types want their freedoms (to worship, pray, believe, not be persecuted etc) yet they want to control the behavior of others that have no affect on themselves in any way whatsoever. That is why I arrive at the “creeped out” conclusion. Perhaps, as others have suggested, it’s because they are closeted or at least concerned that they are somehow “infected”. Getting into someone else’s head is always an exercise fraught with peril IMO.
I think there is something in the Bible, end times prophecy or something that tells the fundamentalists that they will be persecuted (somebody please correct me if I'm wrong) so not only do they mangle and distort their thinking, common sense and logic to believe in a literal Bible, they do the same thing in order to feel victimized. This same simplicity of thought also seems to allow them not to see blatant contradictions and furthers their denial of facts and radical double standards. Logically speaking, if their main purpose was to protect traditional marriage - they would be working day and night to ban divorce. If they honestly feel that marriage should produce offspring, they would ban infertile couples from getting married.
None of their arguments stand up to scrutiny. This is an emotional issue, which, when not blocked by religious meddling into a secular issue, is (disturbingly enough) anchored by a single word. Marriage. It is all a semantics game.
Look at all the the comments from people saying "I'm fine with gays having equal rights, just don't call it marriage". They don't even notice that the second part of their statement completely negates the first.
I don't care what mental gymnastics they have to perform to make everything fit into what they believe. I really don't. I have no problem with people having faith, believing what they want to believe, praying, whatever. They have every right to do so. AND they have every right to be heard when they disagree, they do not have the right to make laws that ultimately force me to accept their beliefs.
All this vote did was to say: We are better than you. You do not deserve what we have.
All they did to deserve what they have was to be born heterosexual. What a struggle that must have been.
I completely agree with Phil above when he says that we should not have to reach out to a minority community to let them know our side. They should know our side, I have always made it a point to know theirs.
What would the people who voted "yes on 8" lose if "no" had won?
