(no subject)
I'm happy about Obama winning, yadda yadda yadda. Historic day blah blah.
NOW!
WHAT THE FUCK, CALIFORNIA?!?!?!
I am so unutterably annoyed right now. It's like the country took one step forward, and two steps back. How can two - TWO! - states that voted for the Democratic presidential candidate ALSO have voted in initiatives to ban gay marriage?? Oh, and CA. Ugh. This back and forth thing is so damned frustrating!
THIS is what I don't understand about all of these constitutional amendments to define marriage as between a man and a woman:
Marriage, in most - if not all - religions is a *sacrament.* Right? Now, in the U.S., even things that are otherwise illegal are often legal when they are religious sacraments. If I understand it correctly, that is. If Native Americans can smoke peyote sacramentally, and Rastafarians can smoke marijuana in a religious context, then shouldn't it also be protected for anyone who is allowed &/or encouraged by their church to get married, to be able to do so? With absolutely NO secular penalties? Meaning, they should be able to enjoy all secular benefits applied to the term elsewise?
I don't know. I was thinking about that today. I'm no lawyer or anything, but wtf, srsly. You can't amend your damned state constitution to PREVENT people from participating in their religious sacraments (unless people are being ACTUALLY harmed - I'm pretty sure Satanists can't sacrifice babies, hehehe!)
NOW!
WHAT THE FUCK, CALIFORNIA?!?!?!
I am so unutterably annoyed right now. It's like the country took one step forward, and two steps back. How can two - TWO! - states that voted for the Democratic presidential candidate ALSO have voted in initiatives to ban gay marriage?? Oh, and CA. Ugh. This back and forth thing is so damned frustrating!
THIS is what I don't understand about all of these constitutional amendments to define marriage as between a man and a woman:
Marriage, in most - if not all - religions is a *sacrament.* Right? Now, in the U.S., even things that are otherwise illegal are often legal when they are religious sacraments. If I understand it correctly, that is. If Native Americans can smoke peyote sacramentally, and Rastafarians can smoke marijuana in a religious context, then shouldn't it also be protected for anyone who is allowed &/or encouraged by their church to get married, to be able to do so? With absolutely NO secular penalties? Meaning, they should be able to enjoy all secular benefits applied to the term elsewise?
I don't know. I was thinking about that today. I'm no lawyer or anything, but wtf, srsly. You can't amend your damned state constitution to PREVENT people from participating in their religious sacraments (unless people are being ACTUALLY harmed - I'm pretty sure Satanists can't sacrifice babies, hehehe!)