Comments | aubrilee: in other news

aubrilee

in other news

Nov 15, 2008 12:13

saw religulous last night. it wasn't as good as i wanted it to be. i felt like maher was too much on the attack. too condescending and agressive, and the movie would have been better had he let the interviewees themselves prove his point. it still had an impact on me, but i think there could have been more ( Read more... )

work, dc, moving, money, diet, sick

Comments 3

ddmelby November 16 2008, 13:43:26 UTC

Prop 8 passed because activist judges went against the will of the people. In the last election Californians overwhelmingly (by 61%) voted against allowing gay marriage. Then the courts said it didn't matter and made it legal anyway. So people were angry. They don't like activist courts going against the will of the people, and they mobilized. Also the reason they lost out was the overwhelming vote of african americans for prop 8, because those against it attempted to compare it to the civil rights movement and also asked them to put their religious views aside for this reason. #1 much of the civil rights movement came from faith and #2 there's a huge difference between the basic human rights that blacks had to fight for (to vote, own property, an equal access to education, etc). I personally believe from the wording in the Declaration of Independence that the unalienable rights given in the Constitution are endowed by their Creator (and since that's based on Judea-Christian values I'll equate the Creator as God). God never granted ( ... )

aubrilee November 17 2008, 06:07:52 UTC

i really can't agree with you on god being against gay marriage. god loves his children. god wants to see his children thrive, in love and compassion.
i think it's ridiculous we're fighting over a word (marriage vs. commitment) but imagine if someone started proposing a "no marriage for ANYONE, only civil unions" act. what if people started justifying the banning of heterosexual marriages, using a doctrine that's thousands of years old and highly interpretable.
it would be ridiculously unfair to everyone unmarried, and you'd be super fricking upset that the one word that matters most in your relationship was taken away.

i just don't understand organized exclusion. if god has beef with it, he'll sort it out in heaven, yes? or start raining frogs down on all the sinners? that's what god does, yes? but if god has issue with it, let's leave it to god to start enacting judgments and punishments.
also, it's clear this is your personal belief. why draw god into it?

ddmelby November 17 2008, 10:53:33 UTC

I'm not saying that gay marriage is right or wrong. This has nothing to do with any personal belief. My personal belief is that the government shouldn't even be involved. Marriage should have nothing to do with any law of any kind. To each their own. But since we're talking about what's considered a "right", I'm saying that God does not give the right to marriage to gays. There's not just one, but dozens of examples in the Bible that says so, Old and New Testament. There is no interpretation needed, it's very clear. Please don't think that by letting things happen as they are and not raining frogs or whatever that God condones it in some way ( ... )