Obscanity: You'll know it when you see it

Video – Breaking News Videos from CNN.com: Turn that noise down! 3:55

PRECIOUS. These kids look totally miserable. This judge found the right punishment!!!

Facebook | Cheryl Hussein Jones’s Notes | If you could save a man from going to federal prison, would you?.

It should be noted that the judge in this case refused to allow evidence relating to medicinal marijuana, including the simple fact that Lynch was operating within state laws. As a result, the jury never knew that he was operating legally or that his 2,000 “customers” were in fact ill patients with legal prescriptions – including a 17-year old cancer patient whose parents brought him to Lynch when nothing else would help him with pain and nausea. There were countless sick patients who were willing to testify to their experience with Lynch, and the judge barred them from the courtroom.

This is an absolute travesty.

CitizenLink: Hundreds Thank Mormon Church for Supporting Marriage.

The National Organization for Marriage has launched a petition drive in response to incendiary attacks from gay activists in California and around the U.S. AboveTheHate.com has collected nearly 1,500 signatures of people thanking the Mormon Church for its support of Prop. 8, California’s marriage-protection amendment.

Well, isn’t that nice of other churches to be so open toward the Mormon Church? Golly, it’s nice that they have gained such wide acceptance.

Oh, wait.

Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization for Marriage, said: “The answer is to organize together in defense not only of marriage, and God’s truth about marriage, but in defense of basic, American decency about how we treat each other when we disagree.”

Maggie Gallagher. Gee, that name sounds familiar. OH YEAH. She’s a MORMON. A BIG Mormon. Her own direct ancestors were polygamists, and although she claims to be rabidly against polygamy, I’ve watched her defend it with my own eyes, live and in person.

So this petition wasn’t an act of open-mindedness and interfaith collaboration. She’s patting her own damned church on the back, and urging others to do the same. Gee. HOW sweet.

I’ll warn you now… my post today contains profanity. Deal with it.

D O G P O E T » Drag Queens and a Few Bricks:

Last Friday a couple hundred gays and their friends chased a small group of young Christian preachers out of the Castro, calling them “bigots” and chanting “Don’t come back!”

I wish I’d been there.

Read More.

I know people are going to be pissed about this story and complain that gay people are soooo intolerant, and not really “helping our cause.” But this guy is right. We’ve been “helping our cause” by being calm and rational for years, and we’re still being treated like shit. Just how much more of this are we expected to take?

How would they expect a crowd of Jews or black people to react if a bunch of white-robed Klansmen or swastika-clad neo-Nazis showed up to demonstrate on the street corner in Fairfax, or Brooklyn, or Compton, especially on Yom ha Shoah or the anniversary of MLK Jr’s assassination? We would demand that they get the HELL out of our neighborhood, and we’d be right. We would CHASE THEM OUT, and somehow I doubt people would have much sympathy for them, even though they’re just “expressing an opinion.”

Historically speaking, members of a civil rights movement being “calm and rational” works best when there is a contingent of people who are fucking pissed off and ready to do what they need to do. Martin Luther King Jr. looked awfully good to white people, compared to Malcolm X. You think radical women didn’t riot in the streets and take over buildings to demand their right to vote at the turn of the last century? And damned if we wouldn’t still be hiding in the bushes and fearing imprisonment for congregating if a bunch of trannies and drag queens hadn’t gotten fucking pissed off at Stonewall. I’m not saying I’m ready to go out in the streets and riot – and I’m certainly not advocating violence. That’s not me. I’m more inclined to be calm and rational. But I’m most definitely not going to tell people they should sit back and let these people trample all over them, especially when they came into the Castro to do it. I am sick to death of gay people having to be super-duper perfect in order to gain “sympathy” from people, and I’m sick of being held to standards that no other groups are expected to meet.

We got FUCKED on November 4. We literally had our rights torn away from us by a simple majority. We were reduced to second-class citizens – again. Six million people voted for bigotry and hatred. I know that’s not how some people see it, but it’s God’s honest truth. Frankly I think people should be relieved that the reaction isn’t stronger than it has been. This state certainly deserves a stronger reaction than it has seen thus far. I know people don’t think they’re being hateful by supporting Prop 8. I know they don’t see it that way. But hate is hate, and bigotry is bigotry, no matter how hard you try to couch it in love and prayer. “Love the sinner and hate the sin” is the biggest cop-out in the WORLD. And I know they say “Oh, you guys aren’t really helping your cause by protesting. We gave you domestic partnership rights – be happy with that.” Yeah. These are the same people who told us to keep our mouths shut when Jews got pissed off over Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ. They’re the same people who told us, “We support Israel, so shut up and let us have our anti-Semitic movie… or else.”

I know some people see this about religious freedom and religious liberties. They say we should be “tolerant” of people’s religious beliefs about how we’re going to hell. But here’s what I want to know: WHEN has ANY other minority group been expected to sit back and let people walk all over them just because it’s their religion that tells them to do it? Some of the worst forms of bigotry and racism have been justified by religion. Slavery was justified by religion. The HOLOCAUST was justified by religion. The Crusades were PROPELLED by religion. Women were treated as property because of religion. Racism against black people stems from the Bible, according to multiple Christian sects (the Mormons didn’t even let black people enter their religion until the late 1970’s, and they were NOT happy about it). Most of the Native American population was wiped out because American settlers believed they had God’s mandate to take this land from them. And of course, we can’t forget that timeless classic, “We hate the Jews because they killed Christ.” But who would expect a black person to treat a Klansman with respect and tolerance? Who would expect a Jew to smile and be friendly to somebody wearing a swastika armband?

Yeah, that’s what I thought.

So why the FUCK should I be friendly and respect the viewpoint of somebody who bases his opinion of me on a Biblical passage that says I should be stoned to death simply because of who I love?

So… back in April I remember seeing a charge on my credit card for like, $4 and change. It was from Paypal, from a company called “SWAGVAULT.” I vaguely remember calling the company to figure out what the hell the charge was for, but I never got through to them. This was right around the time that I was dealing with some medical problems, and I was totally disoriented and not really wanting to deal with chasing around a $5 bill – so I wound up just assuming that it was from one of the comic book vendors on eBay, as I had recently bought a bunch of Buffy comics, all for around $4-$8.

Well, today I tried to add my credit card to PayPal, and it told me that my card number was already linked to another Paypal account! I figured, ah, maybe I linked it to my wife’s account when we were paying bills for the wedding… so I checked her account. No card. Then I thought, hm, maybe it’s on that other PayPal account I set up a long time ago. So I checked there too. I did find $90 I forgot I had on that account (SWEET! Hey, I ain’t complainin’!), but NO CARD.

So I called PayPal and got on the phone with some random person in a call center, and she told me that the account was linked to another email address. She couldn’t tell me which one, though.

Great. That helps! Blegh.

So she transferred me to somebody in the dispute resolution department, and he refused to tell me what email address the card was linked to.

GREAT! More help!

He was able to tell me the domain name of the account’s email address, at least, at which point I was just like, “Oh FUCK.” I don’t USE that mail service.

So I convinced him to at least tell me if there had been any charges, and if so, when, so I could look them up in my credit card statement. He was very, um, reticent about it. Don’t get me wrong; the guy was perfectly nice, and was really helpful and apologetic about not being able to give me more information – but these agents can be kind of coy when it comes to getting information out of them in the first place.

Luckily he was willing to suggest to me that I “might want to look” around March or April of this year. So I looked at March and April… nothing. Aha – but April’s charges are on the May statement. So I looked at May, and tada! There it was. That damned $4.xx charge from PAYPAL – SWAGVAULT.COM. FINALLY, the dam of information was broken – once I was able to identify the date and amount, he was able to give me the full name linked to the account.

That was the one and only charge made to my credit card, thankfully, but that didn’t stop me from calling and requesting a new credit card. Ironically, what started me off with all my credit card debt was a $250 fraudulent charge when I was 18 years old and making no money. (That seemed like a hell of a lot back then). They never did reverse that $250 charge, despite many attempts to report the fraud – but fortunately this time around they were more than happy to refund me my $4 and change and send me a new card.

The moral of the story… even if you do lots of online shopping, make sure you recognize each and every charge on your bill, because fraudulent charges can show up in any amount, and one scammed charge is one scam too many.

Mystery piano in woods perplexes police – CNN.com.

Somewhere in another dimension of existence, a Massachusetts family is wondering who the hell stole their piano.

Nepal SC approves same-sex marriage- Hindustan Times.

Fascinating. So let me get this straight (so to speak): a country in which gay people were not even recognized as citizens a year ago now recognizes same-gender marriage… but America doesn’t? What’s it going to take for America to get its act together???

From Yahoo News:

US elected officials scored abysmally on a test measuring their civic knowledge, with an average grade of just 44 percent, the group that organized the exam said Thursday.

Ordinary citizens did not fare much better, scoring just 49 percent correct on the 33 exam questions compiled by the Intercollegiate Studies Institute (ISI).

How did you score on the ISI’s Civics Quiz?

I’m ashamed to admit I missed 2 questions, #27 and #33, giving me a score of 93.94%. Sad, considering that I’m IN an economics right now… ah well. It’s microeconomics anyway. Not sure if we get to take macroeconomics in my program.

To be fair, I missed #33 because of a semantic misunderstanding; I was reading debt and thinking deficit spending. But in retrospect, the real answer makes more sense.

In any event, I think it’s particularly sad that most Americans would fail this quiz. Sad that new citizens probably know more about American civics than lifelong ones, eh?

Mommy, Mommy, guess what I learned in school today??.

What they never told you in the commercials for Prop 8 was that the case in MA was decided under the “mere exposure” rule – i.e. mere exposure to the knowledge that something exists does not constitute a violation of parental rights. For example, teaching that Mormons exist does not equate with teaching the Mormon faith to your children. And teaching that gay people exist doesn’t equate with teaching your children that they should be gay. They were never “teaching” gay marriage; they merely had a packet of information about many types of families, and one of the families happened to have two parents of the same gender.

Mere exposure to the reality of existence does not constitute “teaching” it in public schools. If you don’t want your kids to know that other people exist, don’t send them to schools where they will meet other people. Nothing proves existence like coming face to face with it.

I have an idea for a new commercial. “Mommy, Mommy! Guess what I learned in school today! There are some people who don’t believe Jesus is the Lord! They’re called Jews! Mommy, I think I might be a JEW when I grow up!” [mother shows concerned look, calls the school board for an emergency session…]

Or even better: “Mommy, Mommy! Guess what I learned in school today! All Americans are entitled to equal protection under the law! It’s called the 14th Amendment! And we have a law just like it in our California constitution.” [mother tilts head in horrified consternation.] “Well, sweetie, actually some people don’t deserve equal rights and protections.” “But mommy, they told us in school that discrimination is wrong and everybody is equal!” “Well, sweetie, some people are more equal than others.” “Oh. Does that mean Christians are the boss of Jews?” “Yes, sweetie, it does.” “Oh, good! I’m going to go tell my friend right now; she wouldn’t let me on her swing set and now I can tell her she has to!” “Good job, sweetie.”

Okay, so I’m a little bit bitter. I did have a childhood friend/neighbor whose parents did a perfectly fine job of offsetting whatever tolerance she may have learned in school. One day when we were about 7 years old, we were playing on the swing set in my back yard and she wanted me to get off of my swing and let her have it (we had two swings, mind you). I said, “It’s my house!” and she said, “Well, Christians are the boss of Jews!” Needless to say, I sent her straight home. She frequently had similar things to say when she was angry; while our families had a working facade of tolerance, in which I would go over there and help her decorate her Christmas tree and she would come over and be our guest at the Passover seder, whenever we were in an argument, it always came down to “I hate Jews,” or “stupid JEWS!” or “Christians are the boss of JEWS!” I have absolutely no doubt as to where this sentiment came from. This same girl’s parents pulled their little boy out of school when “Heather Has Two Mommies” was put on the suggested reading list. So I have every confidence that parents will do JUST FINE at making sure their children are indoctrinated with their own morals even if they are “exposed” to “alternate cultures and lifestyles” in school. It’s not the public school’s job to make sure that children share their parents’ moral values. It’s the public school’s job to give the students an education, and to make sure that they learn how to be contributing members of society. That includes learning about all sorts of people and families, because, hey, guess what? This is America, and this is California, and we are beyond diverse.

Kids (and hell, most adults, still) need to learn that groups of people can be different and still be equal, because equal doesn’t mean the same.

A classmate of mine made a comment about equality and how same-gender marriages are not equal to heterosexual marriages because they are inherently different – and how that is just a fact about their difference, and is not meant to demean same-gender couples. Or at least, that’s what I took away from her comment. But I was thinking about that definition of the word “equal” in terms of marriages, and how under that definition, our marriage is inherently different from theirs and is therefore not equal.

Even mathematically speaking, “equal” doesn’t mean “identical.” It means that two sets of numbers or characters have the same *value*. Saying 2+2 is inherently different from saying “4” which is inherently different from saying 5-1 or 8/2 or sqrt{16} or 2^2. These are all COMPLETELY different expressions that mean completely different things and require completely different approaches – but they are all *equal* values. Recognizing couples’ equality doesn’t mean you’re saying that they are identical, or that they are not different. It says that they are *worth* the same and should be *valued* the same. How would you feel if you *needed* something that cost $20, and all you had was two $10s, and the store wouldn’t take it, because they kept insisting that two $10s was simply not the same as a $20 bill? This is the same kind of frustration we’re experiencing now, because we have something that may look different, but has the same value. Essentially, we’re trying to access this institution with our two $10s, and they’re insisting that only a $20 can buy a marriage license (presumably, a $20 out of the man’s wallet). I disagree. We are equal. We should be valued the same. And we deserve the same rights and responsibilities.

And now for the ridiculous parody cartoon that sparked this whole disjointed rant… ridiculous in the sense that what it depicts is pretty much what went on in the Yes on 8 campaign, which was utter ridiculousness. “If your children learn it, they will become it!”

Okay, I’ve changed my mind. We SHOULD have put our children on TV. The other side clearly had no problem “faking” families with LGBT parents, and depicting contrived conversations that could only have taken place in a Yes on 8 commercial scriptwriter’s fantasies. (I mean, please. This commercial is just… wow. Is this really how they imagine things are in our households? And notice how the kid never acknowledges the other parent in the room. Goes along with the whole argument that having two parents of the same gender is akin to being raised by a single parent.)

So yeah – we should have put REAL families, and REAL children of same-gender couples, on the air to talk about how their families are REAL and deserve REAL rights. Otherwise all that’s left is this ridiculous propaganda.

I don’t see how anybody could possibly be complaining about a rigorous vetting procedure, when politicians’ private lives are increasingly made public and scrutinized by the media. If he doesn’t get this stuff out into the open now, it will be uncovered by bloggers, and it will be made public at the most inopportune time – probably when these people are trying to actually accomplish something significant. There’s nothing quite like a major media scandal to derail the political process…

In any event, I think we’ve all seen what happens when people fail to adequately vet their nominees…

Malignant Tumor Sees Every Day As Gift From God | The Onion – America’s Finest News Source.

Ah, Onion…

Obese have right to two airline seats | Oddly Enough | Reuters.

Very curious as to how social conservatives will view this decision. I can just see the debate now: Side A: “Public businesses have to provide accessible seats to their customers, including larger people, and shouldn’t penalize them by charging double fees if the provided seats are too small.” Side B: “Fat people just want special rights. Let them lose their fat asses if they want equal prices.”

God, why wasn’t I reading The Onion during election season?

Ah, materialism. Onion, how I’ve missed you…

Wow… if I didn’t know this was an Onion article…

Pam’s House Blend:: Domestic Partnership Benefits? They are after those too..

Of course, this shouldn’t surprise us – it’s exactly what the Prop 22 supporters (or as I like to call them, the Kalifornia Knight Koalition) did when the legislature passed AB 205. They ran straight to the court and demanded that we be stripped of domestic partnership rights because Prop 22 prohibited marriage or anything LIKE it from being granted to “those people.”

Every article I’ve read supporting Prop 8 and opposing same-gender marriage can be reduced to some “objective” set of “points” which serve as a very, very thin mask for the religious, moral arguments really being offered up.

People don’t seem to want to admit that they adhere to the moral, religious arguments, and so they couch them as pseudo-intellectual, pseudo-secular arguments about politics and society, rather than be honest about the fact that they really just don’t think that same-gender relationships can ever possibly live up to the high moral plane upon which they place heterosexual relationships.

But of course, it’s impossible to have a genuine dialogue with people who can’t admit that the arguments they’re offering up are not actually the reason they’re supporting anti-equality legislation.

Just be honest, people! Offer up a debate on the issues as you really see them, instead of couching them in the language of secular intellectualism.

Let’s look at these popular “points” of discussion:

1) Gay people can’t procreate, so they shouldn’t be allowed to marry.

What it really means: God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage: This country has never required applicants for marriage to be fertile or to have children. The elderly can marry. The infertile can marry. People who choose not to have children can marry. People who have had tubes tied can marry. Married couples have a constitutionally-protected right to choose to use birth-control even while they are married. And yet gay people have babies every day, but can’t get married. And hey, guess what? Adoption doesn’t require procreative ability.

2) Recognizing gay relationships will lead to recognizing incest, polygamy, or even bestiality.

What it really means: God thinks gay sex is in the same moral category as incest, polygamy, or bestiality.

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage: Well, aside from the fact that incest is already legal in 26 states (you can marry your first cousin!), animals are not adults and cannot sign a contract, and polygamy is double-dipping? A marriage takes two people and makes them a single legal entity. You can’t do that if you’re already a single legal entity with somebody else. It’s a legal impossibility that has nothing to do with *couples*, which the law recognizes. If the law allowed a man to have two wives, *then* we might talk about whether a woman can have two wives too. Until then, the polygamy debate is a moot point. The great irony of course is that if only some states allow same-gender marriage but not others, then polygamy WILL occur. Requiring 50-state recognition is the only way to *prevent* polygamy.

3) Denying the right for gay people to marry is no different from denying the right for an adult to marry a child.

What it really means: Gay sex is morally equivalent to pedophilia and should be denied in the same way.

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage:

A) A CHILD CANNOT SIGN A MARRIAGE CONTRACT. Get with it, people!

B) Actually, that’s not true. In most states a child CAN get married, with a court order and/or parental permission; and

C) If an adult-minor couple (such as Sarah Palin’s daughter and her boyfriend) REALLY, REALLY want to get married and can’t get parental permission, they have the option of waiting until the minor is 18 years old, and THEN they can get married. A gay couple does not have that same option.

D) Let’s stop for a second and get something straight here, okay? (No pun intended).

There is virtually NO other situation in which two unmarried adults who are legally allowed to have sex with each other are NOT allowed to get married.

Incest (sex between close relatives) is ILLEGAL. So the argument that gay marriage will lead to incestuous marriage is moot, because there is a crime being committed by virtue of the fact that these two people are having sex in the first place. Marriage does not absolve them of the crime.

Sex between adults and minors is ILLEGAL. There is a crime being committed by virtue of the fact that they are having sex – therefore, marriage is out of the question, because the relationship itself is illegal. Marriage does not negate the fact that a crime is being committed – except in Utah. (Nah, I’m sure there are other states besides Utah where a 40 year old can marry a 16 year old and legally have sex with her. But that is a WHOLE OTHER moral argument.)

Sex between people and animals is ILLEGAL. There is a crime being committed by virtue of the fact that they are having sex – therefore marriage is out of the question, because the relationship itself is illegal.

Sex between two unmarried adults of the same gender is NOT illegal. No crime is committed based on their relationship. And yet they are barred from getting married on the grounds that their relationship is identical to that in which a crime IS committed.

How is this logical?

Well, it’s not. In fact, MOST anti-gay laws are grounded in the notion that you can legally treat gay people as presumed criminals because their sexual activities are against the law. Job discrimination, housing discrimination, and marriage discrimination all stem from the outdated view that gay sex is not only immoral, but illegal. But guess what? That’s not the case. There is no longer any legal grounds for treating gay people like criminals. And yet it continues.

4) Gay people have the same rights as straight people – to marry somebody of the opposite sex.

What it really means: “Gay” is a disease that can be cured. It’s not an identity; it’s a behavior. Let gay people turn straight if they want to be married.

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage: This one should speak for itself. If you’re willing to make the argument that I should have to subject myself to rape (I would never consent to heterosexual sex) just so I can have access to the institution of marriage, then I have nothing to say to you.

Nobody should ever have to make that choice; that’s what it means to live in a free society.

The argument in Loving v. Virginia was not that being black was somehow an immutable characteristic and that’s why they allowed the marriage. The woman in that case had a choice too. She could have left her husband and found a black man to marry so she could have legal marital recognition. But she didn’t love a black man. She loved her husband. The court acknowledged this ridiculous, offensive argument, but found it to be distasteful and fallacious. Having the “same” rights does not necessarily mean having “equal” rights. A person in a wheelchair has just as much right to vote as somebody who can walk, but if all the polling stations are upstairs, how can you say there is “equality” based on the “same” rights? The law doesn’t have to treat you “the same” in order to treat you “equally.”

In any event, being gay is not a “choice,” not that this should matter, and it’s not an “illness” to be “treated.” Religious membership is a choice, and you’re not banned from marriage because of it. (well, maybe you are by your religion – but not by the government!)

If you believe it’s a choice or some sort of reflection of life experiences? Let’s have a talk some time. Ask me how old I was the first time I liked a girl.

5) But if we allow gay marriage, then we won’t be able to discriminate against gay couples! (Oh noes!)

What it really means: But if we allow gay marriage, then we won’t be able to discriminate against gay couples! (Oh noes!)

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage: Trust me – you’ll be able to discriminate. You’ll still be able to deny us religious recognition. You’ll still manage to keep us out of your congregations. You’ll still hate us even while you tell us you love us but hate our sin. The LAW, however, CANNOT discriminate like that. If you want your religious freedom, then you need to allow me my religious freedom, and that includes the right to have my religious marriage accorded legal rights.

6) Domestic partnerships are the same as marriage, legally speaking.

What it really means: Either “Separate can be equal,” or “You aren’t equal, so why should you get equal access? And by the way, give us time and we’ll go after domestic partnership rights too.”

Why it’s not a valid argument against civil marriage:

A) No, separate is not equal.

B) Even if separate were equal, domestic partnership is not the same as marriage. No husband is taxed on his wife’s and children’s health insurance benefits. Domestic partners ARE. There are a million reasons why these are completely unequal institutions, taxation being only one of them.

C) We already HAVE two separate institutions of unions, and you can’t seem to get your head around that. What makes us think that in another ten years you won’t say, “Domestic partnership is marriage! Protect the sanctity of domestic partnership!”? Civil marriage was supposed to be the secular equivalent of marriage. Somewhere along the way, you guys conflated it, and now we’re fighting over creation of a THIRD institution to do what the SECOND one was supposed to accomplish.

D) The organizations that instituted Proposition 8 have proven time and time again that they are not willing to stop at marriage. They have sued in countless states to eliminate domestic partnership, they have instituted boycotts against companies that give domestic partnership benefits, and they have circulated ballot petitions to eliminate domestic partnership in California. Why on EARTH would we believe they will stop fighting now that they’ve tasted blood?

How long before this 5.5-foot glowing cross winds up on somebody else’s front lawn?

Joe. My. God.: The Truth About Phyllis Burgess.

Yeah, I thought there was more to this story than some innocent old lady being attacked… not saying the crowd was in the right, but dude, she elbowed her way through the middle of the crowd, and had already knocked over a disabled man – and would likely have continued to be violent herself. It seems she’s something of a Phred Phelps character, frequently showing up and antagonizing people at LGBT events.

Still no major coverage of the off-duty CORRECTIONS OFFICER who mocked a No on 8-protesting family (including children) by showing his gun and crowing, “Look what I have!”

After 63 years, vet learns of brother’s death in Nazi slave camp – CNN.com.

One wonders if the US government would have made a bigger deal out of this enslavement and murder if the 350 soldiers had not been separated and sent there specifically for being or looking Jewish. Don’t forget that this is the same US that segregated its troops based on race (black people were good enough to fight, but not good enough to be integrated??), and deliberately kept out of the country hundreds of thousands of Jews who were trying to flee from the Nazis and who wound up being slaughtered by them because they could not find refuge here. The US literally turned away ships full of people who had made it out, only to be sent back.

The US could have done more – it just didn’t care enough. And apparently that apathy extended to its Jewish and “Jewish-looking” soldiers as well. I have always been very proud that my grandpa, a Jewish man, fought for America in World War II. It makes me sick to think that he, too, could have been conveniently “forgotten” by the US Army if he had been captured.

YouTube – Roomba Driver.

Prop 8 Protest and March on Flickr.

This has got to be one of the most entertaining signs…

California Council of Churches: Marriage Equality.

Recent events have converged to make the freedom to marry a concern to all people in California. The California Council of Churches and IMPACT have long stood strong against discrimination against any of God’s children. At the same time, we recognize that many churches and people of faith believe they must oppose the freedom to marry based on what they have been taught the Bible has to say on the subject. Therefore, we have produced this study guide to help congregations in California struggling with differences of opinion on the subject of marriage equality to discuss the biblical texts, theology, church traditions, and civil rights from a place of compassion and love of neighbor — the central elements of Jesus’ teachings.

They have joined the barrage of organizations and entities filing lawsuits to invalidate Prop 8 – and bless ’em for it.

I’m sorry… I simply cannot resist.

“Excuthe me thir… I believe you have my thtapler…”