Saturday, July 17, 2010
"But theology and history aside, it is clear from the lack of consistent reaction to and organization against the litany of other present-day sins that a large number of people who call themselves Christians do not follow the literal interpretation of the Bible either. So, if some of us are picking and choosing which Bible verses to follow, why are so many opting to pick and choose verses that appear to condemn homosexuality and not the one against marrying a woman who isn't a virgin?
If sin is sin, why such Christian angst directed at the GLBT community and not the greedy corporate community, which, quite frankly, has more direct impact on the average person's life?
The answer is simple: Those who are uncomfortable or fearful of someone who is different from them sometimes hide behind religion to gain power, nurture their ignorance and justify their prejudices.
It's no different from Christian slave owners using Scriptures to feel better about enslaving Africans, or men pointing to Jezebel as a way to keep women out of the clergy, or Bob Jones University picking verses that supported the school's ban on interracial dating.
The extremists aren't fighting gay rights because of sin and honoring Leviticus 18:22. If they were, then where are the faith-based organizations spending millions trying to make adultery a crime punishable by death, as suggested in Leviticus 20:10? Is 18:22 more true than 20:10, or does it just support a more common and entrenched prejudice?"
glbt baha'i rants
On the heels of Argentina becoming the tenth country to achieve marriage equality (and the first in South America) Wednesday night, there was yet another important victory closer to home. On Thursday, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled against foes of D.C. marriage equality. Our opponents had wanted to use a ballot initiative to repeal D.C.'s equal marriage law, which the D.C. Council overwhelmingly passed in 2009. Because D.C. law prohibits ballot initiatives that would abridge civil rights, the Board of Elections and Ethics refused to put the discriminatory measure on the ballot. This week, the District's highest court said that the people cannot, by a popular vote, rob their neighbors of basic civil rights. We applaud that decision, which is a victory both for fairness and for common sense.
Have a great weekend.