Minnesota has a question on next week's ballot on whether to amend the state constitution to define "marriage" as only between a man and a woman. Whatever. The people who will vote for it are the people who find the idea of same-sex couples "icky" and somehow a threat to their own 'idyllic' marriages.
What would be amusing -- if it weren't so pathetic -- is watching these people trying to say that same-sex marriage violates the principles of the Bible and then trying to find isolated, dark hidden passages to back them up (Like the racial segregationists used to do). If I were a person who took the Bible literally, which of course I am not, I'd be sort of pissed that I couldn't find clear verses that back up my 'ick factor' prejudices. Why, for instance, I'd be asking myself, if God hated homosexuality, didn't he squeeze it into the Ten Commandments? Or why isn't there some anti-gay rhetoric in the New Testament red letters ("the words that Jesus spoke")?
Or here's another one: If marriage is so sacred that it needs to be defined in the constitution, shouldn't it be against the law for divorced people to remarry? Jesus was not shy about saying that's a No-no. I guess that people in the voting booth, with their third of fourth spouse in the booth next to them, conveniently just don't find that quite as icky and therefore an affront to their hypocritical 'religious' beliefs.
1 comment:
Just have to say I love that you used the word "icky" more than once in this post. Until today, I was being told I was the only person to use such a word, lol.
Post a Comment