25,000 Churchgoers Sign On To Mass. Anti-Gay Amendment

[davidinalameda]

http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/10/100305massAmend.htm

Organizers of a ballot initiative to ban same-sex marriage and civil unions in Massachusetts said that a one-day blitz on churches has put it almost half way to collecting enough signatures for the measure to be placed before voters.

<snip>

Former Boston Mayor Raymond Flynn, one of the petition's chief sponsors, said church officials have an obligation to "speak out on important issues in the civic arena."

"The marriage petition is not against gays but for children," he said. "We believe that a loving family with a mother and a father is the best environment for children to be brought up in."

WTF??? I'm confused-what does banning same sex marriage have to do with children?

I'm all in favor of having a two parent household but does Flynn think that legal same-sex marriage somehow diminished the pool for heterosexual marriages?

[xmas74]

1. they use the same damn argument every time, don't they?

And one has nothing to do w/ the other. It's just the way they twist the argument around in their heads. They say that's it's for the sake of the children . I have always thought that it was just a way for them to regulate the sex life of one group. They'd do it for other groups if they had their way.

[Lexingtonian]

12. Of course

they used 'for the sake of the children' to argue against legalizing divorce. And legalizing interracial marriage. And legalizing contraception. And legalizing or illegalizing Mormon polygamy.

Protection and best interests of the children and the widowed are the only true reasons the state has for any involvement in marriage matters at all. So those are where all arguments logically end up. The Goodridge lawsuit was purely a walk through that territory and some disagreement on the SJC itself about their own interpretative authority.

But most such lawsuits are unsuccessful because the judges duck behind the harm-to-the-children claim in all kinds of disingenuous, dishonorable, mendacious, and ridiculous ways- the latest was the appeals court verdict in New Jersey. The Massachusetts SJC was the first to say out loud that that emperor had no clothes on whatsoever.

Marriage is the social sanctioning of sex between the people being married. The social meaning of gay marriage legalization is the social sanctioning of gay sex. As an institution it amounts to the breaking down of the ghetto walls, the formal mainstreaming of gay life. Gay marriage legalization is not about Social Security benefits, it's about legitimation and integration.

[intheflow]

2. More Focus on the Family BS

Soulforce has a good piece on why this Dobson claim is bunk:

Violent Claim Three: Same-gender parents are unfit and seek to hurt children (PDF file)

[arwalden]

3. Why Are Those Churchgoers So Fucking BIGOTED and HATEFUL?

And to think... people actually wonder *why* I think so poorly of Xianity and so many Xians. :eyes:

[canichelouis]

6. Fear of the unknown

[dickthegrouch]

7. Or fear of the all-too-well known

Face it, the only gay person they know must be so attractive to them that they are terrified. Homosexuality must be so close to their own desires and they are so afraid of meeting someone as bigoted and rigid as themselves that they have to react violently or the rest of us would find out.

It occurred to me to want to ask how many of the congregants in these churches are a hairs breadth away from converting to homosexuality?

Methinks many of them doth protest too much.

[Lexingtonian]

13. Well, look why they go to church in the first place

Churches are safe havens for people who live or want to live in the past. Churches are safe havens for people who don't feel in enough control of the present and don't feel they understand the present and fear Change.

Churches are where people go to hide out from Modernity, places where the world seems cleanly sorted out between Saints and Sinners and makes them feel certain (if only for an hour a week) they will count among the Saints. Outside the church doors the Divine Order Of The World- the caste system of social groups and nations which white Christians in part created and have dominated for some centuries and believe to be in conformity with Christianity's demands and destiny- is falling apart. Their personal standing as a class, and their impersonal standing as Believer of a triumphalist nation-state destined to always be The Light Unto All Nations, is in peril.

They sense themselves as in danger of losing their powers and wealth and desperate and tempted to Sin. They are people who aren't adapting to Modernity's leveling power, at least not yet, and they're insistent on every little privilege or power they can claim as their own. Keeping gay people classified as Sinners is just one element, but it's one that they feel they have power over as they don't over anything else.

[Ian David]

4. Maybe this will get their kids un-molsested? n/t

[zbdent]

5. We should get petitions going to ban

"opposite-sex divorces" and pass them around at churches . . .

[dickthegrouch]

8. Let's not forget that unwed parents cared for Jesus

I still think that one of the biggest oxymorons of the KKKristians is that one of their most revered "families" was not a "traditional" one.

I know of 1.4 million women in 2003 who wish they could get away with saying it was the holy ghost that impregnated them.

Births to unmarried women in the United States hit a record 1.4 million in 2003, while births to teens fell for the 12th consecutive year.

Births to unmarried women increased to 34.6 percent of all U.S. births -- also a new record, said researchers with the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), which released its final report on 2003 birth data yesterday.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20050909-122225-7993r.htm

If the KKKristians are so pure and the bible such a paragon of virtue and truth: how did the human race survive beyond Cain and Abel (both boys) if the only other humans on the planet were Adam and Eve?

Can anyone say incest?

[Jo March]

9. As a Christian, I can't believe that you are equating us with the KKK

I grew up in Alabama and I have seen the KKK and know how horrible that organization is. For you to call Christians "KKKristians" is amazing to me.

Not all Christians are bigots. Some Christians work for gay rights. I am one of them.

So, in the spirit of acceptance, perhaps you could not refer to all Christians as KKKristians, perhaps?

[dickthegrouch]

10. I was using that precisely to differentiate

Real caring Christians from the hypocrites who call themselves that but who really seem obsessed with hateful thoughts and actions.

The harm that has been done throughout the ages in pursuit of evangelism and indoctrination is nothing short of astonishing to me.

The notion that supposedly well-educated 21st century humans still buy the corrupt messages put out by many mainstream religious practitioners is just offensive to me.

I am sorry I offended you. Do you have any suggestion for differentiating in the way I intended?

[Jo March]

11. I'm glad that you clarified - thank you

I understand what you were trying to do. I call them Fristians. It embodies the concept that they are following earthly leaders and not Christ.

Christ would not stand for this - not the Christ I grew up learning about and reading about.

I understand what you are saying about the harm that has been done in the name of God. It is astonishing. I grew up in Alabama, like I said. I've seen how the KKK folks twist the Biblical teachings to suit their own agenda, little caring for what the passages actually mean!

I'll try to be less sensitive about it but I wanted to make the point that we are all on the same side and that all of those who say they are Christian aren't like these zealots & bigots.

Welcome to DU! I hope your stay is long and enjoyable! :hi:

[bluedawg12]

14. That's their mantra - it's for the children

they state the ideal family: one mom and one dad.

they then declare that is the best way to raise kids.

they then add, that society, churches, and government have a duty to promote the higest ideals.

therefore, gay marriage, that may lead to gay families, is not in the best interest of the kids.

to support this they cite some controversial studies and BINGO!

it makes for good sound bites, and chuch hall lectures by guys like Greg Stanton and pro-family groups.

we need to know their tactics, old ones at that, to refute them.

there are many studies out there that show that children of agys parents grow up to be normal.

[bluedawg12]

15. Nice rebuttal on anti-gay marriage laws

This is from a blogger, it's a quick read and worth zipping over to the link.

http://ciceronianreview.typepad.com/ciceronian_review/2005/01/

>Indiana Is Feverish
Earlier this week the Court of Appeals in Indiana upheld the state’s statute barring same sex marriage. The reasoning of the Court is remarkable, and so I remark upon it. Here are the key passages

The key question in our view is whether the recognition of same-sex marriage would promote all of the same state interests that opposite-sex marriage does, including the interest in marital procreation. (p.12)...<

the blogger goes through the court opinion and then offers an interesting rebuttal:

>There are a host of mistakes and weird claims in this analysis, and nothing that counts as a reasonable argument. Indeed, it is hard to know quite where to start with this. The historical claim implicit in this “reasoning” is ridiculous. Marriage, as a state institution, does not have to with responsible and irresponsible procreation. It has to do with inheritance of property, mainly real. That line is a whole-cloth fabrication of a couple of local loons (yes, there is a Utah connection). It is dismaying to see a court engage in such transparently political fabrication, and on uncontroversial historical issues at that...<

Read on, this is a nice over view of some debating points for a rebuttal to repugs.

[sakabatou]

16. Will someone please think of the children?!