Election 2008: Win For Dems, Fundies; Huge Failure For Gays

Posted by Pile (10263 views) Add this story to MyYahoo Add this article to del.icio.us Submit article to Reddit Add story to Furl Add story to StumbleUpon [E-Mail link]

While everybody is celebrating (or whining about) Obama's victory, they might have missed the fallout from the election from various religious campaigns. Namely an array of propositions passed all across the United States banning gay marriage and even restricting same-sex couples from adopting unwanted children.

The religious lobby has claimed victory in repurposing government to impose their dogmatic moral guidelines upon society at large.

In California alone, more than $74 Million was spent, mostly by the Mormon church to lobby for retroactively banning same-sex marriage.

Gay marriage bans have now gone up in several states including: Arizona, California, and Florida, and in Arkansas, the voters passed "Initiative 1" which made it quite clear they'd rather have unwanted children be wards of the state than be adopted by loving parents who might happen to have the same gender.

In Colorado (via Amendment 48), they even went so far as to try to amend the state constitution to redefine the definition of life to "begin at conception." No word whether or not women who miscarry will be charged with manslaughter or second degree homicide. Luckily, this amendment did NOT pass, but more than a half-million people voted for the measure.

So where should you move to these days? It used to be that California and Florida were at least somewhat immune from dogmatic religious idioicy but no more. One state however, Michigan, reversed the trend by passing two propositions: one that legalized medical marijuana and another that authorized stem cell research. Go Michigan!


Posted by Naomi on 2008-11-08 12:14:52
UGH! I would just like to add my frustration and bafflement over the recent passing of Prop 8 in California to this post.

First off, isn't there a little thing called separation of church and state?!
I can understand if a church encourages it's congregation to be politically active, but SHOULD NOT try to sway them either way.

Secondly, their big argument was to "protect the sanctity" of marriage. Have you seen the divorce / annulment rates recently? Especially by those who are idolized by America?
The sanctity of marriage was violated by heterosexuals way before the homosexual "threat"!!

As if making someone a second class citizen for who they happen to fall in love with wasn't enough, we won't let them try to have a family?!!
Especially, as you say, "from adopting unwanted children."
There are thousands (probably much more) children who do need homes that actually care about them. Children in foster systems are more likely to put themselves in cycles of abusive relationships and self-destructive behavior because they don't feel they deserve any better, because they are told there is no one out there who wants them, because they won't let people who actually WILL want them, have them!!!

I know I'm not the only one that sees the problem with this.
Posted by Pile on 2008-11-08 19:01:25
I agree... this is one of the many reasons why I don't think church's should receive tax-exemptions in the first place. And there should be major campaign finance reform and the elimination of the "issue ads" loophole.
2 cent
Posted by Booger Pete on 2008-11-09 08:28:37
Disembowel all homosexuals and let God sort them out.



Name: (change name for anonymous posting)

1 Article displayed.

Pursuant to Section 230 of Title 47 of the United States Code (47 USC 230), BSAlert is a user-contributed editorial web site and does not endorse any specific content, but merely acts as a "sounding board" for the online community. Any and all quoted material is referenced pursuant to "Fair Use" (17 U.S.C. 107). Like any information resource, use your own judgement and seek out the facts and research and make informed choices.

Powered by Percleus (c) 2005-2047 - Content Management System

[Percleus 0.9.5] (c) 2005, PCS