Simple, atypical but neat estimation of energy released in fission
1 week ago in The Curious Wavefunction
Field of Science
-
-
Calcium and Vitamin D Supplements Still Don't Work, New Study Says4 weeks ago in Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
-
-
-
Civil Unions permitted in Lincolnland
We citizens of Lincolnland don't get too many opportunities to brag, but in approving civil unions for same sex couples, Lincolnland got one right. Gay people have always been among our circle of friends and acquaintances, and many of them have been couples for nearly as long as the Phactors, yet without any of the legal protections of actually forming a couple. Locally the argument has long been framed as one of religious freedom. Religions that condemn homosexuality, oppose same sex marriage or civil unions. So when last this came up it was necessary to ask the speaker why under the auspices of religious freedom couldn't our church (Unitarian) marry same sex couples since no such prohibitions existed? Ah, well then came the blather about the slippery slope, the danger this posed to "real" marriages, and the downfall of society. So what about our religious freedom? Well, you all know that in the USA religious freedom is taken to mean the freedom of the majority religion to do as they damn well please and everyone else had better allow it. But try to even the playing field, and suddenly the majority is persecuted. The poor dears. A rather prominent citizen here abouts went on an anti-gay rant, and somehow a stage whisper leaked out, "What a bigot." And they said, "Well, that's what my religion says and what I believe." OK, so you're a religious bigot, fine, but a bigot none the less. There was a fine round of applause.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
This confuses and dismays me. If gay marriage devalues the sanctity of traditional straight marriage, as all the anti-gay folks say it does, then does Illinois having civil unions somehow make my Iowa gay marriage worth less than it was? Logic says yes, right? Or, you know, "logic." Says yes.
Opposing gay marriage to "protect traditional marriages" has no logic to it at all, and relies on nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to "protect" some named traditional value. And yet in what way was it threatened? Didn't even try to respond to the slippery slope of "now what?" Pedophiles wanting to marry children, marriage to animals, and so on. It's what passes for logic among true believers. The way to settle it is very easy; from the perspective of the state, everyone has a civil union. If they wish, they may have a purely religious ceremony too.
Post a Comment