bore me to tears

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged bigotry, christianity, fundamentalism, military, politics, religion, separation of church and state | 10 Comments

10 Responses

1. on February 10, 2010 at 6:05 am JJ

   Surely it was rhetorical goading? — as in his question to Michele Bachmann last year about whether Congress should probe the patriotism of its liberal members. Give ‘em the rope to hang themselves with?

   
   
2. on February 10, 2010 at 10:06 am Lynn

   I just learned that, apparently, someone with the AFA (American Family Association) made a similar comment just recently. I also remember that, just as w/Sprigg, James Dobson (Focus on the Family) – and other evangelical Christian leaders – were also very upset by the Court’s decision to reverse sodomy laws. I don’t know if Sprigg was goading Matthews, but I don’t doubt that he meant it.

   
   
3. on February 10, 2010 at 11:17 am JJ

   Oh, I too have no doubt they mean it! But I like that Matthews et al is goading them into saying it for the record, to all of America, instead of in the sacred tax-favored shadows where they pretend they aren’t political . . . think of it as Freedom of Information and government transparency!
   :D

   
   
4. on February 10, 2010 at 2:09 pm Nance Confer

   Like calling Palin the idiot she really is. Suddenly it’s OK. I like it.

   Of course, nobody tops Colbert — “Palin is a f******* retard!”

   Nance

   
   
5. on February 10, 2010 at 2:24 pm Lynn

   Nance: “nobody tops Colbert — “Palin is a f******* retard!”

   We enjoyed that skit immensely! :) Even if it was only “satire.” LOL

   Palin’s (moronic, snotty) explanation of the difference between the two “different” uses of the “R word” was surreal. What is it about some evangelicals and satire?

   Here’s that video (at Colbert Report; YouTube has removed it):
   http://tinyurl.com/yc9h5rz

   
   
6. on February 11, 2010 at 11:09 am sam

   I’ve been keeping up with the Prop 8 trial, and one of the big issues was the desire of the plaintiffs to have the trial televised. Several of the defense witnesses dropped out because they feared retribution. This is how they work. They want to damn gay people without their bigotry being called for what it is.

   The depositions took place in ’09 and can be seen on YouTube, and below is a link to Courage Campaign and a post that discusses this. You can also find the videos there.

   http://prop8trialtracker.com/2010/02/10/scared-experts/

   The problem with the depositions? Though both these people are fighting equality, they are both forced to admit that marriage equality would be good for gay people as well as children being raised by gay people. The two defense witnesses that didn’t run scared were also forced to admit, on the stand and under oath, that equality would be a good thing.

   
   
7. on February 12, 2010 at 12:24 am Lynn

   Hi Sam,

   I haven’t been following the trial as I intended to. Is it going well then?

   
   
8. on February 13, 2010 at 3:59 pm sam

   The part of the trial with the experts being questioned by the opposing sides is over. The judge is taking a couple/few weeks to look at the different things that were submitted as evidence, and closing arguments should be sometime in early March from what I’ve read at the site above.

   The trial seemed to go well, but the whole reason that it’s happening at all is because a bunch of lying anti gay people convinced just enough of California’s voters that gay people getting to have equality in civil institutions would lead to pedophilia and the end of marriage and family as we’ve known it the entire six thousand years since god created the earth.

   The anti gay side had two witnesses take the stand. Their side tossed softball questions and talked about family and the deinstitutionalization of marriage. Yeah, say that word even one time fast. When the pro equality side questioned the experts it was revealed that neither of them were actually experts, that their evidence was bullshit, that they had no peer reviewed anything published ever, and their star was even forced to admit that allowing same sex couple to marry would strengthen their relationships and families and would be better for both gay couples as well as their children. As far as the star witness goes, the judge admitted that if it were a jury trial that, due to the star witness being an expert in nothing he wouldn’t even be allowed.

   
   
9. on February 14, 2010 at 7:23 am Nance Confer

   Sounds like it should be an easy call for the judge then. :)

   Nance

   
   
10. on February 14, 2010 at 11:53 am Lynn

    That sounds very encouraging, Sam! :)

    LOL at “the end of marriage and family as we’ve known it the entire six thousand years since god created the earth,” by the way. So, that’s what Rick Warren was talking about!!