Do we really separate church and state?

Our government is promoting religion. And while it may not be just promoting a single religion, it has opened the door to persecution of those who do not practice any religion. I say this based on rulings in courts around this country concerning anti-gay legislation that has been passed, upheld, and challenged. Whether it is any of the anti-gay marriage amendments in the 30 states now listed or any of the four anti-gay adoption laws in this country that only harm the thousands of children waiting for loving families. Our government allows them to remain in spite of the fact they are in effect because of religious bigotry and hatred. Of those who voted in favor of Prop 8 in California did so because of their religious beliefs. If athiests were the majority in this country and voted to ban ALL marriage, what would the religious do? Why, cry discrimination and bigotry, of course. And they would be correct. What someone will do for you, they will do to you. Religious folks would be wise to heed that sentiment. And another they may wish to consider is that as expressed by Shylock in "The Merchant of Venice" by Shakespeare. For gays just may, one day, "better the instruction." As much as the vile religiosity may deserve that betterment of instruction it would still make for a very sad time.

Chuck

Who's enslaving whom now?

Religion has done some horrible things in the history of our world. And when we were forming our new republic, our new nation, we attempted to prevent that. We didn't do a perfect job with this task, but there is hope that we can work to make it better. That didn't happen on Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

The ballot initiative Proposition 8 in California has shown us that we are all too eager to bully those weaker than ourselves. We achieve greatness only to beat down the "other" amoung us. It's truly sad to see. This law banning gay marriage in the most populous state in our country was approved by more than 70% of the same black voters who voted for Barack Obama. They reached out for equality for blacks and slapped back equality for gays. Exit polls indicate they did this because their RELIGION doesn't agree with homosexuality. Mr. Obama said the very same thing about gay marriage when he was campaigning. You might remember that NY Times article I mentioned a while back, and if you don't please do take a look in the archives. I'll go through and post the link here when I find it. He said he doesn't agree with politicians legislating their own religion into law but he would do just that because he's a christian. Seems his followers think that is ok, too. Of course it wasn't ok post 1963 when it applied to them, but it does now when it applies to those "others" they don't like. Nice.

Protecting marriage in the minority communities means telling 18,000 couples that they are no longer married under civil law because you don't like their spouse. Protecting marriage in 2008 is voiding the love of not only those 18,000 married couples but those countless numbers who are building a relationship of love and commitment with one another. Protecting marriage today in America, a nation of "equality" for all, means telling people they are not entitled to the full benefits and protection of our U.S. Constitution, that they are only partial citizens of this nation.

I suppose our next move is decide just how much of one person each "gay" is in this country. You know, for census sake, and collection of taxes, and determining the value of property. Oh, I have a splendid idea. How about 2/3? Yeah, that sounds just about right.

Chuck