RECENT  POSTS:  » But does the Archbishop even believe in gay? » Video: Move over aliens, plagues, Sharknados—it's committed gays who'll soon kill Western Civilization » Nine former water-carriers for 'ex-gayness' join all credible scientists in denouncing 'ex-gay' propaganda » The operative word is 'yet' » Video: Tony Perkins for politically-driven pastors to test (if not run afoul) tax exempt status » Ruth Institute (former NOM affiliate): Same-sex marriage is as much of a wedge as interracial marriage bans » NOM finally admitting that marriage amendments are, in fact, bans » Kentucky's big anti-LGBT org hopes to pray away a fair court ruling on civil marriage » Iowa's governor sponsoring anti-gay Family Leader summit? » Head of Virginia's top anti-gay org: One mean email proves 'the left' is sexist, intolerant  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/01/2010

MisReps Cheatus (D-liberately)

by Jeremy Hooper

Rep. Cheatham (D-North Vernon, IN):

201003010932



*AUDIO SOURCE: Indiana Democrat Supports Marriage [Focus On the Family]

God told him to vote against us, huh? Oh, well that's fair. After all, it's not like he's using a justification that's completely outside the realm of the should-be civil marriage discussion, or that he's using a supposed personal commandment that is wholly impossible to argue against. And it's not liking he's overlooking the fact -- the FACT! -- that no gay activist is seeking to force any church to marry anyone, or the fact -- THE FACT! -- that religious ceremony is already an optional component of marriage.

Oh wait a minute: Yes, he totally is overlooking all of this! And he, an elected lawmaker, is saying that his personal faith views on this one subject should define CIVIL policy for an entire state!

It's beyond unreal that we're still having to have this conversation in 2010. But as long as we live in a nation where people can claim a personal conversation with God as a common and acceptable bullet point in their legislative powerpoint presentations, then we who traffic in the literal legal landscape are going to keep *facepalm*ing our way through this should-be, could-be closed CIVIL case. As long as folks like Rep. Cheatman can use their sources of personal calm for the cause of causing us personal disruption, we will never be free.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

"[Albert] Ellis contends that he has made it clear that devout religiosity, rather than religion in its usual definition, tends to be emotionally harmful." Ellis, Albert, American Psychologist. Vol 47(3), Mar 1992, 428-429.

Ellis is no longer with us, but his contributions have helped to eliminate religion's stranglehold on what they falsely call "morality" especially with regard to sexuality. I think that the APA should go further, and classify "devout religiosity" (zealotry) as a psychological disorder. Then, maybe, we can finally get some help for these whack-jobs (technical term for loonies).

Posted by: Dick Mills | Mar 1, 2010 3:13:14 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails