Anti-Mormon bigotry in California’s prop 8 battle
This is a no on prop 8 TV ad. It may be the worst example of religious bigotry in politics I have ever seen in my lifetime.
-
Search SA
-
Premium BlogAds
-
-
Patron Saint
Pages
-
Archives
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
- May 2006
- April 2006
- March 2006
- February 2006
- January 2006
-
Blogads
-
Meta
Powered by WordPress
Wow. That was awful.
To millions of people including me, a religion-inspired political campaign to deprive gay people of equal rights is “the worst example of religious bigotry in politics I have ever seen in my lifetime,” or at least way up near the top of the list. You, by comparison, should be happy – the thing you’re upset about is a youtube video, not a law.
Men getting together and calling it marriage is no more an equal rights issue than me putting on a funny general’s hat and calling myself Napoleon is. Religion isn’t persecuting, reality is.
Sorry Sam…the civil rights argument doesnt fly the gays had all the rights in California, but it wasn’t eniough, they wanted the name too!
You know what is wrong, saying that members of the Mormon Church are not allowed to petition for their point of view. That ad is pathetic, although my guess is it did not run a lot.
And by the way, I support that proposition being voted down. While I disagreed with the Cal. Supreme Court imposing gay marriage by edict, I also would vote for gay marriage if it were presented to me. But gay marriage proponents do not help their cause with ads like this.
KC’s right.
Whenever liberals suggest we compromise, we should think back to this whole adventure. We compromised. They got every legal prerogative of a married couple. They didn’t want compromise; they wanted the whole shebang.
It really is true: When liberals say “compromise,” they mean conservatives giving in to their demands.
“It really is true: When liberals say “compromise,†they mean conservatives giving in to their demands.”
Keep in mind that many liberals, too, think the next compromise will be the last one. They are either further radicalized by activist pressure, or they become “conservatives” dedicated to preserving the activist gains but never reversing them.
As for ads, I kind of want to see a Unitarian- or liberal Episcopalian-bashing ad claiming they want to rewrite our laws to reflect their same-sex religious ceremonies. It might be a bad idea to use the petty Church-State separationist club, but it might be a worse idea to let only the radicals claim the mantle of First Amendment anti-establishmentarianism.
Free Sex Toys if you vote
At least they are not being party specific, but there you go.
“…the gays had all the rights in California, but it wasn’t eniough, they wanted the name too!”
The nerve!
Did any TV station actually run this commercial?
Looks like gay marriage is voted out in California.
I think gay marriage will eventually pass in states like California by voter initiative or legislative action. The driving force in the rejection vote was the emphasis on teaching about same sex marriage in public schools. Had that not been an issue, gay marriage may have remained in California.
Look for some compromise legislative action next.
teaching about same sex marriage in public schools
Don’t you mean indoctrinating?