Log in

No account? Create an account
Dear religious conservatives: - Baxil [bakh-HEEL'], n. My Sites [Tomorrowlands] [The TTU Wiki] [Photos]
View My LJ [By Tag]

March 2nd, 2004
05:36 pm
[User Picture]


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
Dear religious conservatives:
You've been protesting against San Francisco Gavin Newsom's decision to follow his conscience and break state law by officiating over same-sex marriages for several weeks now. You have advanced the argument quite vociferously that people who think the law must be changed should nevertheless obey it, because "rule of law" is the thin line separating us from anarchy.

On Monday, the California Supreme Court ruled 6-1 that a Catholic charity -- which employs people from a wide variety of religions and aids mostly non-Catholic indigents -- must, against its conscience, provide funding for contraceptives in its employee health benefits package. This is because existing California law quite specifically requires it, and the court just validated the law.

What was some of the immediate response to news of this court decision?

"There are two moral routes to go. One, ignore the state mandate ..."

"I know this is harsh but hope they just ignore this order and reap the wrath."


Please note that Newsom is challenging a law in order to bring the relevant law's constitutionality before the courts. The church has already challenged their law, gone to the state's highest court, and lost.

So please kindly shut the fuck up about your precious "rule of law" now. If you don't want to obey the law, the courts or the state Constitution, I don't want to hear your aggrieved whining about a mayor bucking the first of the three.

(n.b.: Let's not even get into Roy Moore.)

Current Mood: crankycranky
Current Music: Mozart, "Mass in C, K. 427"

(5 comments | Leave a comment)

[User Picture]
Date:March 2nd, 2004 06:46 pm (UTC)
Roy Moore is against a Defense of Marriage Amendment. He doesn't think that we should put in Constitutional amendments to legislate morality.

Okay, admittedly, this is because he believes that such morality is already inherent in the Constitution, but he still ends up as a very bizzare ally on this issue. . .
[User Picture]
Date:March 3rd, 2004 02:35 am (UTC)
Truly, politics makes for strange bedfellows.
[User Picture]
Date:March 2nd, 2004 09:28 pm (UTC)
While I agree with what you are saying, a point of order: I have not heard any direct statements from the Catholic Church saying that what Newsom is doing is wrong. And Conservative Christians are often not Catholics.. they are most likely Protestant.

If you know of any such statements coming from the Holy Roman Church, I'd like to hear of them.
[User Picture]
Date:March 3rd, 2004 02:32 am (UTC)
I am not certain whether you are asking about "condemnation of homosexual marriage" or "aggrieved whining about the rule of law" when you refer to "such statements," but it looks to me as though you're asking about the former. So:

American Catholicism seems to have a stubbornly independent streak, but the Pope at least technically is the supreme spokesman for the religion, and he has gone on record quite forcefully against same-sex unions -- and calling for all public authorities, especially Catholic ones (which apparently Newsom is), to cease and desist in any efforts to legitimize them.

I don't mean to pick on the Catholic church. But the news is what it is, and given that the first reaction to that news on the page I linked was "Ignore the law!" ...
[User Picture]
Date:March 3rd, 2004 08:16 am (UTC)
No argument that the Catholic Church's stance on homosexual marriage is "no way, Jose."

My only assertion was that the majority of the saber-rattling regarding a constitutional amendment, and the direct condemnation of government officials like Newsom, is coming primarily from Protestants.

In other news, Multnomah County (Portland), OR said they were going to start doing same-sex marriages today...
Tomorrowlands Powered by LiveJournal.com