the whole book

at life group the other week they were talking about how, as a christian, you must respect everything in the bible. it's not a buffet, you know, so you can't pick and choose. since the bible is the word of god, and since you believe in god and trust him to be all-knowing, you must also believe in every part of the bible. (we're not talking about literal interpretations of the bible, mind you, just the tenets and such).

someone vaguely alluded to gay marriage, though no one expanded on it. but it was the first thing i thought of too when they were talking about accepting the bible as a whole. then a couple days later i ran into the following clip from the west wing.

amazing! i wish i knew about it earlier and had memorized it so i could've asked life group about it!

but seriously. the bible stuff just so confuses me. the koran is believed to the actual word of god (well, pretty much anyway, muhammad transcribed what god said, so for all intents and purposes, god wrote it). so it makes sense that you should believe every word but even christians will tell you that the bible was not written by god, it was written by man, and lots of them, spanning many years. who's to say that some of these writers didn't insert their own agenda into the bible? or, for those unwilling to believe in such outright deceit, possibly parts of the bible were incorrectly translated or transcribed over those hundreds of years before people invented copiers, but before anyone invented photoshop.

a long time ago (i think this was before high school) i asked my friend's mom, who is very religious, if god made gays. i mean, god makes everyone, right? but he hates gays. so why would he make them? i don't remember what she said, but i do remember her response having nothing to do with "people aren't born gay. they decide to be gay." which brings me to this video...

obama on gay marriage

Biden Apologizes to Obama for Marriage Controversy

1. biden makes me laugh. but seriously, he's kind of a numbskull...
2. about the obama thing: FINALLY!!!

i wonder how much of a real difference this would make. my mom (who is a registered democrat and against gay marriage [tho not gay rights...]) said she would vote for obama anyway because this is just his opinion, and he doesn't get to make laws about gay marriage. i also think that as against gay marriage as you may be, what matters most to you is probably your pocketbook. so assuming you're not a staunch democrat or republican, you'll probably vote for the candidate that has the best plan for economic recovery, job creation, etc, regardless of his/her stance of gays, guns, and abortion. tho all else being equal, you would start to "nit-pick" on issues that don't necessarily affect your daily personal life. but since we're talking democrats and republicans here, i doubt this will really make that huge of a difference. were this the primaries, maybe.

btw, regarding my mom (and many others). she's okay with gay people having "domestic partnerships" or whatever you want to call it, with all the same rights as marriage. but, she is uncomfortable with it being called "marriage". i think this is incredibly strange. i mean, if you're for their rights, why deny them the word? this reeks of "separate but equal". words make a difference. i mean, you wouldn't call a black person a n*gger, because it's simply not the same thing. marriage and domestic what-ever-the-hell are not the same thing because you would not use the words interchangeably.

no difference

i'm sure this has been brought up before, but does choosing to be gay or straight even matter? (personally, i think for most people it isn't a choice; for a small minority, however, i think it is) let's say it's always a choice and they want to get married. ...so what? as long as they want to get married for the "right reason" i don't have a problem with it. too many straight people get married for all sorts of dumbshit reasons or they get divorced because they simply don't care to work on that relationship. would gay people do the same? probably. but why deny them the the opportunity to legally express their love and commitment to each other?

food integrity

highlights from daniel klein's article: are chipotle and trader joe's really selling food with integrity?

"Beyond helping them [immigrant farm laborers] to know their rights, CIW also created the Campaign for Fair Food asking the major tomato purchasers in this country (fast food chains, grocery stores) to pay a penny more per pound for tomatoes, and asking farmers to put that penny towards the workers... Taco Bell has agreed to join the plight for farm workers, as have 9 other major corporations including McDonald's, Subway, Burger King, and Whole Foods. But guess who wont: Chipotle and Trader Joe's.

"Yep, the two corporations whom you would assume would be at the forefront of workers rights issues, are distancing themselves... And that Chipotle --  the company who promotes the integrity of their food and practices more than anyone -- wont partner with CIW in adopting the Fair Food Principles is especially baffling.

"Both have written statements about their uninterest in partnering with CIW... These actions seem very at odds with the Trader Joe's and Chipotle image. They both claim to be doing it their own way, but as Eric Schlosser was quoted as saying: "Claiming you support farm-worker rights but refusing to work with CIW is like someone in the '60s saying they support civil rights but they won't work with Martin Luther King, Jr. or the NAACP.""


btw, if you're for gay rights, here's some more food for thought. chick-fil-a donated nearly $2 million in 2009 to groups that have anti-gay agendas (source).

god vs gay?

whether or not the bible is pro- or anti-gay, i don't understand what the bible has to do with our government's laws. we don't have an official religion; that would be unconstitutional. so why should our government cater to the current religious majority? you may think that your religion is correct, but others think theirs is correct. either way, they don't force you to take communion, make a hajj, get cremated, or not eat animals. besides, christianity can't even agree on whether or not homosexuality is wrong! some experts say yes, some say no. it isn't exactly clear cut, like how in the ten commandments god forbids you to murder.


keep religion out of our government, and especially out of my bedroom! and if you keep your religion out of my bedroom, i promise to keep mine out of yours.

protecting free speech

if you've been following the news at all, you must've heard about the supreme court's decision about westboro baptist church (google news links, summary article). and as terrible, shameful, despicable, hateful, disrespectful as i find these westboro baptist protesters to be, i think the supreme court made the right decision (though justice alito dissented).

also in the news last week was dior designer john galliano's anti-semitic rants in paris (google news links). galliano was fired from dior and is now facing possible jail time for his racist remarks.

not to trivialize galliano's disgusting behavior, but many people think it's a bit unfair that a drunk guy saying racist things should get jail time, when gay-bashers with hateful signs can show up to a funeral of a soldier (who may or may not be gay!!) and have our highest judicial power defend their right to do so.

but galliano was in france. and we're in the states. and i don't think ANY other country takes "freedom of speech" as seriously as we do. it's illegal in france to say anti-semitic things. and i heard in germany it's illegal to name your kids after hitler (unable to verify this tho). and it's illegal in lots of other countries, to say anything against the government (even if it's actually true!).

but every citizen of america has the right to free speech in america. the westboro protesters can say hateful things, and i have the right to protest at one of their funerals and say equally hateful things, if not worse! of course, i'm not a fucking douche bag so i wouldn't do that.

the thing i have a problem with, is that as much freedom of speech as we have, there are limitations. i can't say "fuck" on regular tv. that's kind of weird, actually. i'm also not allowed to say defamatory things about people (tho i think the westboro baptist protesters are defaming god when they say stuff like "god blew up the shuttle" and "god hates fags" but i think in order for it to count, he'd have to press charges...)

why couldn't the supreme court have set up limitations for the protesters? you can protest, but only from 500 yards away, or anywhere that's not on the funeral route.

it's so disrespectful! this war we're fighting, it's not over gay rights! (it's debatable what we're actually for but for damn sure it's not gay rights). this soldier didn't die for gay rights. in fact, many of these soldiers may actually be against gay rights (most americans are anyway, and soldiers tend to be more conservative, upping their chance of being anti gay rights). if god really hated america because we like gays, why didn't he cause 9-11 to happen in san fransisco or hollywood? i mean, new york? they're liberal, but i wouldn't have picked them as the poster city for gay rights. america even!! why not the netherlands: "the first country in the world to grant full marriage and registered partnership rights for same-sex couples" [source], or even spain, cananda or south africa! yes, certain u.s. states have given rights to same-sex couples, but many haven't. and our federal government doesn't have laws protecting one thing or another.

gah. anyway. i agree with chief justice roberts who said that the 1st amendment protects "even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle public debate." tho i really wish that the westboro baptist protesters could see that whatever your opinion on gay rights or free speech, you should be respectful of the dead. especially those who died to protect you and this country with its very liberal freedom of speech laws.


and to finish this up on a funny note: the 30 best anti-westboro baptist church protest signs

judgement

honestly, no matter how you feel about same sex marriage, you should at least respect carrie prejean (former 2009 miss california) for having the courage to say what she believes in even though it's probably not in her best beauty pagent interest to do so. i think a lot of people in her position and with her position, knowing that the judge who posed the question is gay, would've dodged the question. they would've blurred their answers so you wouldn't really know what their stance is. carrie, inarticulate as she is, very clearly states that she is not in favor of same sex marriage. well good for her. it may have cost her the crown but at least she wasn't bullied out of saying what she believes in. everyone is entitled to their own opinion and they should have the right to express it verbally.

(video of her response)