Hey CWA: Why are our lives never a 'concern'?
There are a few things with which the Concerned Women For America are clearly not "concerned." Sounding hyperbolic is one. Conceding even an inch on the court's deserved role in civil rights matters is another. Oh, and they also couldn't care less about whether or not their faith views infringe upon the liberties of others. Take these two quips from two different CWA staffers for examples of what we mean:
Wendy Wright: "California judges provoked the voters to pass this marriage amendment by ignoring the referendum that was passed in 2000 to define marriage as between one man and one woman. If a judge ignores California's citizens a second time, the damage would go beyond imposing same-sex 'marriage.' It would destroy trust in the judicial system. In demanding that they get their way, homosexual activists are threatening public safety and the integrity of our system of government."
Marriage Wins in Three More States [CWA]
Janice Shaw Crouse: "These victories for traditional marriage resulted from heroic efforts by pro-marriage leaders across the nation. Their efforts were, in many respects, similar to David going up against Goliath. The homosexual activists launched unprecedented public relations efforts, and they were supported by the media who gave them positive coverage. In California, voters reversed the decision of their State Supreme Court decision last May to make same-sex "marriage" legal in California. Arizona came back to support marriage after falling short in a previous effort two years ago. All of those efforts in support of same-sex "marriage" were nothing, though, when they were up against the prayers of thousands of Christians across America who fasted and prayed that our nation would protect marriage as the foundation for the family. These believers recognize that married couples who form strong families and nurture children in solid values are a bulwark against those forces that undermine American culture."
Marriage Unites as Politics Divides the Nation [CWA]
Okay, first off: California judges "provoked" the voters? Oh that's cute, Wends. But here's the thing: Justices are not in the business of provocation -- they are in the business of ensuring that unjust provocations do not stifle the rights of others. You know, like when faith-based people of this church-state -separated nation try to use their personal relationship with God to thwart the CIVIL equality of their fellow citizens? That's the type of stuff that is and should always be within the court's purview!
Which leads us to Ms. Crouse, who acts like this battle was one involving a mega-rich band of well-connected peeps versus a rag tag group of evangelicals who had only their prayer and fasting to save them from the pesky gays. The problem with that? THE ANTI-GAY SIDE SPENT MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS ON THIS! THE ANTI-GAY SIDE AND THEIR REFUSAL TO ACCEPT A PRINCIPLED RULING IS THE ONLY REASON WHY HIS FIGHT EVEN EXISTED IN THE FIRST PLACE! And in terms of connectivity? Well they, as always, relied on their automatic network of various houses of prayer, where faith leaders can handily rally thousands simply by telling them a certain vote is their Godly duty. While we will fully admit that we spent tons of cash on our side and that we did have the support of most every media outlet, public company, and celebrity willing to go public, our coalition was hardly a 'Goliath" up against a scrappy lil' "David." It'd be far more appropriate to call our side a broad-based assemblage bound together by the common goal of equality, while theirs came across like an angry and unapologetically deceptive torch-wielding mob who cared little about who they burned!
"It would destroy trust in the judicial system. In demanding that they get their way, homosexual activists are threatening public safety and the integrity of our system of government."
My punching fist is getting all itchy...
YOUR people destroyed our trust in the intelligence of voters both in 2000 and now, in that they tried to pass laws that CLEARLY went against the nature of the constitution and the whole 'no majority deciding rights of the minority' and 'equality' bits.
These women are so infuriatingly stupid, I swear that someday I will invent a time machine with the sole purpose of going back and informing their parents about contraceptives.
Posted by: aaa | Nov 10, 2008 12:59:51 PM
I look forward to seeing the looks on their faces when the supreme court rules in our favor.
Posted by: r | Nov 10, 2008 3:48:28 PM
Note to Janice:
More fasting, less talking.
Posted by: Bill S | Nov 10, 2008 7:34:49 PMcomments powered by Disqus