« I told Chris he'd regret this... | Main | Come glide with me.... »
July 31, 2003
And now for the ranting.
I would like to be as sophisticated as Chris, and as brief, but I can't. So I'll start with "AAAaargh!" I understand that the Vatican is all about tradition. I understand that homosexuality is a touchy subject for them, especially as it's turning out that many "celibate" priests are not, and at the expense of kids who are at a severe power disadvantage. Still, the Pope gets to make rules for Catholics, because that's how the system works. I accept that. BUT...
Now the Vatican thinks that it gets to make rules for everyone, even you and me. So everyone "committed to promoting and defending the common good of society" (which I actually THOUGHT included me), whether Catholic or not, is supposed to oppose homosexual marriage, and not just that, but any legislation that would give gay couples the same rights as married couples.
"Why?" you may ask. Go ahead, ask. Okay, I'll play Pope and explain. See, kids, homosexuality violates something called "natural moral law." God, who is omnipotent, didn't intend for there to be homosexuality. Humans are sinful creatures with free will, and homosexuality is just a terrible perversion of what God wanted, but since we can do what we want, it sometimes happens.
If our all-powerful God intended there to be homosexuality, there would be homosexual animals, right? See, animals don't have free will, they HAVE to follow God's laws. And since there are no verified examples of homosexual behavior among, say, oh, I don't know... penguins, bonobo chimps, whales, giraffes, rodents, geese or bears... (These are NOT just random examples.) ...then homosexuality must be unnatural, right? And a violation of this "natural moral law," right?
Our friends the Italians are fighting the good fight, though, with great protest signs like "Democracy, yes. Theocracy, no." and are comparing the Vatican to the Taliban. The Italians literally have Vatican City surrounded, so we can hope. And pray.
Posted by Deana at July 31, 2003 10:02 AMComments
From the article, quote . . .
In a footnote citing a 1992 comment on the topic, the document also noted that there was a danger that laws legalizing same-sex unions could actually encourage someone with a homosexual orientation to seek out a partner to "exploit the provisions of the law."
. . . quote.
This is so funny on so many levels I don't even know where to begin. Anyone else get it?
This is a good thing, kids. The more they scream, the more progress we are making. It's like trying to stop the Big Bang a second too late. It took the Church 300 years to canonize Gallileo and it didn't make a damn bit of difference in the end. In fact, the Church lost face, big time.
I imagine a time when the Church comes out in favor of gay unions -- carefully worded to avoid the "m" word -- in a "separate but equal" turn -- a hundred years after it's become globally accepted. Then I imagine a time when the Pope comes out (as gay). Then, later on, the Pope tells us she's a lesbian. 'Course the Church has been outcast to the moon Phebos by that time but it hopes to regain some status with the announcement.
~deb who's already civil unioned so tthhfffpptt!!!
Posted by: debby at August 1, 2003 08:21 AMReminds me of my favorite Ghandi quote:
First, they ignore you.
Then they laugh at you.
Then they fight you.
Then you win.
Yay, ranting! I made a quick comment on my blog about this yesterday, but the huge flood of anti-gay news this morning made me want to scream. I thought about ranting more on my own blog, then guessed (correctly) that there might already be an active discussion over at Globalspin.
I was also a big fan of the Italian signs, and I just hope that the rest of the world is more openminded than the pigheaded nincompoops in Washington and the Vatican. Is Bush really so confident in the next election that he can shamelessly discriminate against a significant portion of the population? I know most wouldn't vote for him anyway, but it seems like this should mobilize the gay community like never before.
Legislation of the bedroom seems like such a petty, self-righteous thing for the administration to focus on in times like these. It makes me want to slap some sense into the Son of a Bush. Can I say that without instigating a Secret Service investigation?
Posted by: Jaime at July 31, 2003 12:23 PM