Listen: Jews and Christians aren’t all THAT different. Both believe that the Messiah will come, only for Christians it will be the second time. First of all, of all disputes to have, it seems to me it’s like arguing over whether or not God visited the 7-11 one extra time.
Anyway, it’s easily resolved: when he gets here, ask the the Messiah, “Hey, have you been here before?” Of course, then the “I told you so”s will begin. Oh- and if he answers, “I’ve always been here,” then he’s not a Messiah, but a Vorlon. And if it’s Ragnarok, then the Norwegians can really get a good laugh at the bunch of us. And if nothing happens, we can all continue arguing. What Fun!
The rats are out of the ship, now that Senator McCain has lost. Although they are on all sides of the spectrum, here is an article from CNN that demonstrates just how fast the Family Research Council has started complaining that moderates are to blame, and that Republicans should shift right. While anyone’s 20/20 hindsight is less than interesting, as we discussed prior to McCain’s loss, his problem was that he tried to advance two separate strategies and alienated both of his bases. John McCain did not simply run a moderate race.
Arguably, however, the reckoning will go the other way: President Bush’s administration is about as unpopular AND as far to the right as one could possibly get in America, and John McCain could not run farther from it. As proof, where was President Bush the last month of the campaign? Answer: he was hiding, keeping a low profile, as we previously discussed. Elizabeth Dole, a conservative, lost her seat in the Senate, and Virginia has gone blue.
The fight for the soul of the Republican party is on. Whether they will remain right wing conservative will very much depend not only on how the electorate views the McCain loss, but how President Obama and the economy fares in the first two years.
One of the odd “advantages” of being married and gay in San Francisco must be that couples get to have weddings every couple of years. At first San Francisco passed a domestic partner law back in the 1990s and then they started issue marriage licenses under Mayor Gavin Newsom. At some point those were invalidated and now couples can once again get married. But wait, California has an initiative on the ballet to overturn the legality of those marriages. Presumably this debate will seesaw from one side to the other, and each time it becomes legal to do so, a gay couple can marry. The county clerk’s office makes out like a bandit until everyone gets tired of the game in the process.
Here’s the problem: each time a law is passed that forbids gay marriage, someone’s rights are taken away, in this case the right to be recognized as married, to have spousal rights, and to take advantage of other perqs only offered to married couples.
If the government is going to discriminate in such a way, we should ask either who it helps or who it hurts if they don’t. One could easily see why the government might need to restrict movements of someone with an infectious illness. One could agree with the argument for not giving driving licenses to the blind. But here, who is hurt if a marriage license is given to a gay couple? Nobody. Absolutely nobody.
It might make a person feel good to take someone else’s rights away, until that person has his or her rights taken away. Suppose we forbid the practice of religion? I could argue that there are immense social benefits to doing so. In fact I might continue that line of thought in the future. But keeping in mind the Spanish Inquisition, the recent abuse children in the Catholic church, and everything that went on in between (including standing by while many died in WWII), we could make a strong argument that religion is harmful, because we’ve seen evidence of it being harmful. We cannot say the same with gay marriages.
So let’s outlaw religion first, at least for a while, and see if the abuses curb. If not, then let’s agree to keep government out of the church. But let’s also agree to keep government out of the bedroom.