RECENT  POSTS:  » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters » Add 'professional advocate for anti-gay scouting' to list of bygone career choices » NOM to lasso the White House with a rosary. Or something.  

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

03/10/2010

Video: Because eating away our peace requires an empty stomach

by Jeremy Hooper

We couldn't eat for days after Prop 8, as the cruel vote turned our stomach from a place that was settled and hopeful for our nation, to a place where discrimination was so personally targeted and so negligently unapologetic that it'd make any principled America's bowels go irritable. Though apparently, we had it all wrong. Apparently if we hadn't been so busy feasting on the equality in our midst, we wouldn't have to suffer the cruel famine to come. For according to major Prop 8 backer Jim Garlow, a movement's personal eating habits are what truly wins a ballot initiative:


Garlow Reveals The Exact Moment God Decided to Pass Prop8 [RWW]

Nausea.

**REMEMBER: Garlow (and Bishop Cordileone) at "The Call", 11/08:

(click to play)

(click to play)

(click to play)

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


Your thoughts

Wow...people are taking up a medieval/ancient tradition just because they don't want me to have the right to marry. And he talks about distorted priorities?

Posted by: SebastianSFGNrt | Mar 10, 2010 1:33:43 PM

It's Proposition Ate!

Posted by: Dan T. | Mar 10, 2010 11:21:48 PM

They're making such a childish argument. Oh wait no, I mean a superstitious argument. Oh wait no, I mean a religious argument. Hmmmm where to draw the line...?

The thinking that goes "if I fast, God will be pleased and reward me with X" is so incredibly flawed. If it happens that whatever they're wishing (praying) for happens, they attribute that success to their fasting. If, however, they lose, they end up in a state of cognitive dissonance and have to rationalize how they are still right despite the obvious fact they were wrong.

If I remember correctly what Richard Dawkins said, this is why he won't debate a theist - their circular logic means that by definition they cannot be wrong.

Posted by: DN | Mar 11, 2010 12:48:12 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails