If you believe in this, you are a liar.
By saying this in response to gay marriage, you are explicitly saying you believe that the love they share between them is a sin against God and that it should be torn apart, ripped asunder. It is unequal, it is lesser, and they are less human because of it. Using mistranslations and re-translations (don't think that everyone has forgotten that American protestants changed the wording of the bible for the sake of politics) to justify hate is nothing but an attempt to defecate on Jesus' message.
I am not as gentle as others are about this topic-- nor do I claim to be. Actively hurting people because you call them sinful is, itself, a sin against God. As is preferring children to starve than to associate with "sinners"-- if there are fiery pits of hell like many such bible-thumpers believe in, then that is a sin explicitly stated in the bible that you will be thrown in to it for committing. Lying is also a sin, ESPECIALLY lying in order to hurt people-- which is something that bible-thumpers love to do. Reducing people to nothing but their sex drive is nothing but hate as well.
Love though, is not a sin. Be it the gentle, playful love of a close-knit family, the passionate love of newlyweds, or the everlasting love of lifelong partners, love is the opposite of sin. Love is, in fact, God.
There is too much pain and suffering in this world. Stop spreading more...
Tuesday, April 8, 2014
Monday, February 10, 2014
And for the last three weeks I have been denounced from the floor of parliament to newspaper columns to the seething morass of internet commentary for “hate speech” because I dared to use the word “homophobia.” And a jumped-up queer like me should know that the word “homophobia” is no longer available to gay people. Which is a spectacular and neat Orwellian trick because now it turns out that gay people are not the victims of homophobia — homophobes are the victims of homophobia.She brings up a sadly common response to pointing out bigotry. I recommend you watch the entire performance, myself.
Saturday, January 11, 2014
... but it might be to others.
The whole thing is FAR too long to post it in its entirety here, but it is a great read.
In 2006, researchers from the University of Maryland set up a bunch of fake online accounts and then dispatched them into chat rooms. Accounts with feminine usernames incurred an average of 100 sexually explicit or threatening messages a day. Masculine names received 3.7.
The whole thing is FAR too long to post it in its entirety here, but it is a great read.
Tuesday, December 3, 2013
The Brain Scoop: Where My Ladies At?
This was an incredibly difficult video for me to write and record. I haven’t been this uncomfortable or nervous about an episode since we decided to launch the Wolf series. I did it because I know my fellow female creators are with me: these comments are not easy to ignore, and they do have a negative impact on our desire to make videos and blaze trails.
Things can be said about women being more sensitive than men, or that men deal with these comments too, or that we should just accept that they’re going to happen.. but if I do, I’ll quit. If I accept that this is just part of the deal, this is what it is and always has been, it’s a requirement of my job to toughen up and barrel through, I won’t be able to continue. The remarks are enough to make me want to throw my hands up and retreat to a tiny cabin in the middle of nowhere. If the compromise is that I need to become desensitized, I would probably just do something else instead.
Let’s not create that kind of environment for our peers. Let’s be supportive, encouraging. Focus on the content, not the presenter. Ignoring the fact that these comments are uncomfortable is dismissive and counter-productive: let’s have less tolerance for both those comments, and the apathetic attitude attached to how they affect our community.
And, please: check out the women in the video description for more fantastic channels to subscribe to.
Monday, December 2, 2013
Read this, figured I'd share it.http://www.suntimes.com/news/steinberg/21004925-452/anti-gay-bias-loses-its-legal-whip.html
How can McDonald’s sell cheeseburgers, even though they’re banned in the Bible, which is fairly clear about not mixing milk and meat?
OK, the Bible isn’t clear at all — I’m just making stuff up, a popular pastime when it comes to matters religious. There’s a pair of lines in Exodus about not boiling a kid in its mother’s milk — cruel, if you think about it — that Jewish scholars decided centuries ago means not to mix any kind of meat with any dairy, since you can never tell if any given patty is related to a certain cup of milk.
The question remains: How can McDonald’s sell cheeseburgers, violating Jewish law? Not a toughie. Answer: Because the laws of kosher don’t matter to anyone but observant Jews. There is no health reason why you shouldn’t mix milk and meat. Jewish dietary law has no bearing on secular law. Jews, a scant minority, are uninterested in trying to force their arcane practices upon non-believers (except in parts of Israel where, alas, emboldened by numbers, observant Jews seem determined to show they can be just as bullying as any other faith).
Anti-gay Christians are now approaching their cheeseburger moment — welcome, welcome — after the Supreme Court has tossed out much of the Defense of Marriage Act and California’s Proposition 8. The legal whip drops from the fundamentalist hand, which strikes them as oppression, forgetting they can still practice whatever private dogma they like regarding gays — never marry their own gender, disown their own gay children — but gay marriage is going up on the menu in more and more states. Society is marching — running, really — off without them, into a future of gay folk living openly without fear.
It hurts, bubbie, I know. Here’s a Kleenex.
You’ll get used to it. Take it from a Jew. You get used to the world not singing along with your religious peccadillos. (Not that keeping kosher and discriminating against gays are comparable, except as religiously inspired irrational acts). No harm in cleaving to your faith in the midst of a carnival of all you don’t believe. At Christmas, it isn’t like I suffer through all these foreign practices — caroling, wassailing, midnight massing. I accept them with humility — it’s not my party, but it’s someone’s party. It isn’t all about me.
That takes practice, but you’ll get used to it. Used to more gay couples in TV commercials. Used to more same-gender pairs gazing out of the wedding announcements. My younger son and I were walking up Clinton Street last week and a pair of men coming out of the French Market paused to kiss — bye-bye honey, see you at dinner — directly in front of us. I felt the need to say something — a common reaction of mine. “We’re not in Northbrook anymore,” I said, a lame invitation to discuss the tableau, which went unheeded. The boy said nothing. Maybe he didn’t notice. Still, saying nothing is an undervalued skill. Michele Bachmann and her ilk, who clearly lost and will keep losing, announced they will re-double their efforts.
“Time is not on the side of those seeking to create same-sex ‘marriage,’ ” said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council. “As the American people are given time to experience the actual consequences of redefining marriage, the public debate and opposition to the redefinition of natural marriage will undoubtedly intensify.”
Perkins says lots of dumb stuff, but you have to savor this bit of gibberish, because it is wrong in every particular. Time is not on their side. Time is conveying them onto the bench of shame with Bull Connor and Henry Ford. If you look at any opinion poll, desire to oppress gay people is directly proportional to age — older folk have the strongest anti-gay bias, younger people, less and less.
And the “actual consequences of redefining marriage” are that fellow American citizens whose relationships were ignored or trivialized by society suddenly can get buried together in military cemeteries, make important medical decisions for each other, and hold their heads high at PTA Parent Night.
There is a bedrock truth below all this, one that would have been unchanged no matter what the court ruled: Gay people don’t make worse spouses, or parents, or friends. If they did, chuckleheads like Perkins would wave any scrap of evidence like a flag. But there is none, so bigots have to try to twist these advances into some kind of religious oppression — that hating gays is a bedrock of Christian faith and to try to change that is persecution.
Good luck with that one. Ask the next rabbi you see if he feels oppressed because the United States government doesn’t enforce Jewish dietary laws. He’ll take a step back — distancing himself from the crazy person — and say, “No, and believe me, we know what real oppression is.” That’s where Perkins et al. will be in 50 years, only their privately held torch will not be a harmless dietary quirk, but a shameful, refuted hatred gilded with a thin, worn and crumbling veneer of faith.