RUBIO’S BIG FEAR…LIBERALS TURNING CHRISTIANITY INTO HATE SPEECH

…the Bleacherman has entered the conversation… 

Marco Rubio, sniffing the gutters searching for votes, raised his head and offered another round of attention-grabbing not-so-wise wisdom. He believes that liberals are turning Christianity into a dogma of hate speech.

I can only laugh at the absurdity of his observation. Liberals have nothing to do with this labeling. Christian extremists are doing this to themselves. They need no one’s help in turning a doctrine of love and brotherhood into a cult of hate-driven lunacy.

Rubio also believes that gay marriage is a clear and present danger to Christianity. Again, the absurdity generated laugh starts again. Statistically, the number of same sex relationships in the US is numbered to be around 750,000 or maybe 1,500,000 people. The number of people claiming to be of the Christian faith in the US numbers around 216,000,000. So it is hard for me to see how the behaviors of a little more than one half of one percent of a demographic grouping can constitute a clear and present danger to anything.

If there really is a threat to Christianity then the source of that threat comes from within. Young people are walking away from religion because the belief in a God has become so filled with hypocrisy, so polarizing, so politicalized and so commercialized that it no longer resonates in a world faced with the consequences of realities that the Church chooses to ignore and downplay.

Too many so-called people of God are now seen as both hateful and sinful. Priests abuse children and the Church does nothing about it until it is forced to do so by a tsunami of adverse public opinion. Ministers and preachers stand at the pulpit and call for the death of gays. Religious leaders condemn gay marriage because it, in their view, threatens the institution of marriage yet these same leaders hide in some back room when the issues of divorce, adultery or spousal abuse are being discussed.

Yes, Mr. Rubio, Christianity is under attack but not by non-believers, gays or even aliens from Mars; its most lethal enemy is itself and its most extreme believers. These men and women of god with their deep seeded beliefs reek of their own hypocrisy as they cherry-pick their way through through the bible to support their racial and social hatreds.

You claim the ground of being anti-gay marriage and anti-abortion but you also claim the ground of condoning adultery, child abuse, degradation of women and divorce-gone wild. You march with guns drawn and defame the religious teachings of others with profanity and blasphemy. You quote Leviticus 20:13 to support your opposition to homosexuality but ignore Leviticus 20:10 which provides similar punishment to those who commit adultery. Hell, you elect adulterers to the US Senate and vote for them for President.

You, Mr. Rubio, you and your hypocrisy is the real threat to your religion. One day you will look in the mirror and in a freak moment of truth you, too, will agree.

…the Bleacherman has left the conversation

SHARIA LAW IS COMING TO AMERICA: IT’S CALLED ‘EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANITY.’

…the Bleacherman has entered the conversation…

It seems that Ted Cruz has expressed a passionate desire to strip the entire federal judiciary (including the Supreme Court) of its expressed power to hear cases brought by same sex couples seeking the right to marry.

Yes; that’s right.  Ted Cruz, the man who brought the words and wisdom of Dr. Seuss into the U.S. Senate, thinks it is time to screw with the U.S. Constitution and throw away the basic principals of our democracy.  He wants to change our democracy into a theocracy and truly turn this country into a Christian-only Nation.  

But that’s just today

Ted and his Crusaders – and I am not talking about a sixties rock band here – are off to destroy this country.  Religious freedom and diversity is this nation’s strongest attribute and yet the zeal of Ted Cruz and crusade-minded conservative Christians are blinded to the reality of the potential consequences of their actions.

Today it is gay marriage.

Tomorrow it will be abortion. 

Then what?  Will the deep-seeded roots of religious freedom demand an end to the separation of church and state.  Will God be back in schools and forced down the throats of the unwilling like  a  foul tasting medicine?  Will we be required to declare someone named Jesus as our savior?  If we fail to join the flock will non believers be ostracized, banished or burned at the stake?

Will there be a Constitutional amendment naming Christianity as the official religion of the land and the practice of all other religions be prohibited?  Will a citizen have to prove his or her Christianity in order to run for public office?

Do you really think I have taken my own fears to the extreme?  Did you ever think that someone running for the office of President of the United States would advocate limiting the powers of the Supreme Court and thereby compromising the protection of the balance of governmental power we now enjoy?

The great Roman Empire died a similar death.  Maybe someone should open up a history book or is something like reading something other than an approved Bible already an established anathema?

…the Bleacherman has left the conversation…

BIGOTRY DISGUISED AS RELIGION

…the Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

Reincarnate Paul Revere; the Children of the Inquisition are on the march once again. They are swarming over the landscape like locusts on steroids. They have infiltrated numerous state capitals and have infected state legislatures with a religious paranoia that blinds people to the truth. Instead of seeing the world around them as it really exists, they see a domain inhabited by evil people threatening to storm their Cathedrals and take their religious rites, rituals and divine codifications away.

These followers of Elmer Gantry seek to reserve the right to hate those who do not accept their specific doctrine of religious teachings. These zealots of a God and his ancient and archaic commandments believe they have the right to hate, discriminate and exile all those who they see as non-believers and sinners. These people if a divine wisdom seek to force all to hear and obey the word of THEIR god. Hell, some of these zealots are now saying that our Bill of Rights only apply to Christians since only the Bible came across on the Mayflower.

(Weren’t the people on the Mayflower fleeing their own religious persecution?)

And now, the Chief Justice Roberts’ lead Supreme Court has bestowed upon the Christian masses the legal right to force feed THEIR religion to believers and non-believers alike and do it through the offices of local government on the pretext of tradition. Tradition?
Tradition, my ass; religion, any and all religions, are acts of faith and faith is defined as a strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof. So this tradition the Supreme Court acknowledges as all powerful is at best a heartwarming, soul southing hunch or maybe just a beginning-of-the- game adjustment to one’s jock strap.
Integrating religion with the practice of governing is dangerous. With religion comes hypocrisy and with hypocrisy comes non-religious motives setting new, far-reaching and potential harmful agendas disguised as an exercise of some religious freedom.

Pharmacists, citing religious beliefs, can refuse to sell women the day-after contraceptive but have no problem pocketing the profits from the sale of condoms and Viagra. Let’s be honest, shouldn’t religious pharmacists ask men who are seeking erection enhancement medication to provide an affidavit that clearly states the man is married and the intent is to procreate the species?

If Bible loving people condemn gay marriage and homosexuality shouldn’t they equally object to sins like adultery or politicians giving false testimony against their neighbors? I mean God’s law is God’s law, right? I mean, to the best of my knowledge, God has not come back to Earth and negotiated a compromise which discounts some laws and promotes others to a level of a Supreme Commandment. So what gives mankind the right to treat the doctrine of God’s Commandments as if it were a trip to Walmart; where convenience and pricing determine behavior?

And if religious obedience was so loosely defined, how can the Supreme Court give such credibility and power to what amounts to be a headline. Christian! Does being Christian begin and end with accepting Jesus Christ as one’s savior?

Will the day come when we all will be forced to acknowledge a savior in fear of being discriminated against, ostracized in our community or subjected to a modern day form of the Inquisition?

Don’t laugh. The possibility – here in America – is fast approaching.

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

THE COST OF DOING THE RIGHT THING

…the Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

President Obama came out this week in support of same sex marriage and equal rights for the Gay Community.  Immediately, pundit after pundit ran to their radio mikes or their television studios to comment on how his comments would either hurt him or help him politically.

Since I am not a political pundit, I cannot comment on the response his statement will evoke among the electorate.  But why is no one simply saying that he did the right thing and if in the end it cost him votes, then he should be further admired for caring about what was right for Americans rather than what would get him more votes.

One of the many things wrong with America today is politicians are afraid of doing the right thing.  They weigh their decision on the results of some political polling rather than on trying to decide what is best for this country.

And yes, I will acknowledge that this environment of poll-driven policy decision making is how  democracy works.  Sometimes getting votes has a higher priority than getting something accomplished in Washington, D.C.

Yet how far do we want to move in direction of absolute populism?  Senator Rand Paul claims that there is a sickness in America. In a commencement address he said, “there is a sickness out there that needs more than political leadership. It needs spiritual leadership.”

Yes, I agree with Senator Paul.  There is a sickness out there in mainstream America and yes we need more than just political leadership.  We need spiritual leadership; the spiritual leadership that promotes religion in its designed format – one that is free of partisan influence and prejudice.

How do you limit religious deficiency to a debate on gay marriage and abortion?  How do you ignore the plight of the under-privileged and the poor?  Is there not a religious tenant that focuses on compassion and caring for those who can’t care for themselves?  How does one beat their religious-defending chest and bellow about abortion and gay marriage and sit quietly while elderly are losing their meals on wheels program?  How does one claim the moral and religious high ground when many who truly deserve help are being denied such outreach?  How do we claim moral justification in giving oil companies billions of dollars in subsidies while taking away a person’s ability to receive health and reproductive care?

Sometimes I even wonder if we, as a much divided nation, even agree on exactly what is a right thing…do we even know ourselves?

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

KEEP YOUR CHURCH OUT OF MY LIFE

…the Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

In a country that in theory is founded on the separation of Church and State, it sure seems as if the Church wants to dominate every aspect of an individual’s life.  Where is my freedom, where is my right to NOT believe in Church – any Church – any doctrine?

Why do I have to live by the dictates of a Bible that I believe is pure fiction?  Why do I have to accept the constraints of a specific morality when I do not accept the authority of that which defines its dogma?  Where is Ron Paul to protect my rights of liberty; after all, does he not claim to be a libertarian and if he curses government in his life then he surely must curse the invasion of government sponsored and sanctioned religious morality into our lives as well?

Today the Tea Party claims a desire to return to the principles and standards as articulated by our founding fathers; whatever that means.  They desire to return to a country ruled by White, God- Fearing Protestants where government was minimal and an individual was free to roam the country at will free from the repressive regulations of the EPA, SEC and ObamaCare.

God would be everywhere.  Slaves would till our land and unemancipated women would tend to our kitchens and children.  This is Sarah Palin and Michele Bachman’s America.

At least in theory, we are not a Christian nation but that would be hard for me to believe when I see the Church’s footprint everywhere in my life.  Some morality is necessary and universal.  That I accept. The thou shall not kill thing works for me as long as all the disclaimers come with it, like state sponsored executions, war and ignored genocides.

As early as in 1797 – a time when many of our founding fathers were still alive, the United States Senate ratified a treaty that affirmed that “the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.”

If this was a false statement then surely, with many of our founding fathers alive and many serving in government, the outrage of affirming that America was not founded on the Christian religion would have surely forced the abrogation of any such agreement.

But today we are anything but a non religious state.

It should not be the government’s role to decide just who can marry whom.  The argument over gays right to marry is the perfect illustration.  New York’s Archbishop Timothy Dolan equated the recent push in the state of New York to legalize same sex marriage as equal to the actions of restrictive Communist regimes. He stated that, “Last time I consulted an atlas, it is clear we are living in New York, in the United States of America – not in China or North Korea.  In those countries, government presumes daily to ‘redefine’ rights, relationships, values, and natural law.”

Okay, but what the fuck are you advocating here, Mr. Archbishop?  Are you not advocating that the state define relationships based upon your religious beliefs?  How can you do so when you are so selective and myopic in asserting the laws of your God?  Okay, your God says that homosexuality is a big no-no.  Your God also puts a high priority on the fidelity of marriage yet I see no push to kill adulterers.  Case in point for you to ponder is the case of Senator Vitter of Louisiana.  Hell, the good people of his state re-elected him….would they have done the same if he came out and proclaimed he was gay?

Here is the bottom line.  This is America.  Keep your fucking religious beliefs to yourself.  Live your life as you wish and God bless you for that.  But let the rest of us live the life as we see is morally right.  Keep your religion to your Churches and I’ll keep my sinning and transgressions to mine.

…the Bleacherman has left the stadium…

PROPOSITION 8: IT IS A QUESTION OF LIBERTY AND FREEDOM

The Bleacherman has entered the stadium…

 It seems that half of this nation seeks a smaller, less obtrusive government yet they want this small, unobtrusive government to come into our bedrooms and to legislate morality.

  In a referendum in November, 2008, the voters of the State of California approved an initiative that banned gay marriage.  Less than two years later, U.S. District Chief Judge Vaughn R. Walker ruled that Proposition 8 violated the federal constitutional rights of gays and lesbians to marry the partners of their choice.

 His ruling is expected to be appealed to the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals and then up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

 Needless to say, the political right, the political far right and the moral right are angry and upset over this ruling.  Again they complain and chant about activist judges overturning the will of the people.

 An example of their anger is reflected in remarks offered by Austin R. Nimocks, senior legal counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund.  He said, “We’re obviously disappointed that the judge did not uphold the will of over 7 million Californians who made a decision in a free and fair democratic process.”

 Now hold on their Austin.  Yes, the voters in the state of California did approve the ballot initiative banning same sex marriage.  But your number 7 million is wrong and distorts the argument and manipulates the facts.  The final vote results on the issue of gay marriage (Proposition 8) reflect that 5.3 million voters approved the measure while 4.8 voted against the ban.  The difference was 500,000 votes or just 5% of the total votes cast. 

 The fact, the truth, the reality is that the measure did not pass overwhelmingly. 

 So I am not so sure I understand what is the argument and why are we arguing about our right to live the way we want to live.

 The self appointed, self anointed moral police (no, I am not talking about the moral police as is found in many Muslim countries) believe that marriage is and always has been and always should be a union between a man and a woman.

 Backers of the gay marriage ban believe that such union sets bad examples for children and they believe that children fare best with both a mother and father.  They backers also claim that the very institution of marriage is threatened and compromised by the right to enter into a gay marriage.

 I strongly emphasize that I appreciate and honor and respect these beliefs.

 But  I disagree. Strongly!

 I believe and statistics I am sure support the fact that more marriages are destroyed by infidelity then by gay marriages.  Look around.   Estimates now put the divorce rate at over 40 percent.  I highly doubt that gay marriage is the primary, precipitating and contributing factor in a large number of these divorces.  So if you want to use the threat to marriage argument to oppose gay marriage; you need to amend your argument to include a prohibition on divorce and infidelity. 

 Statistics also show that there is no quantitative difference on how children fare between traditional and gay marriages.  It is assumed that you can be like Sarah Palin and make up facts but the truth is the truth.

 And don’t bring God into the argument.  If your argument is that God tells you that homosexuality is wrong, that same God also says things like  EXODUS 20:14 “Thou shalt not commit adultery”  and DEUTERONOMY 5:18 “Neither shalt thou commit adultery”

 I will only accept your God argument against gay marriage when you also argue and legislate against adultery.  Only then will your argument have merit and validity.

 To the BLEACHERMAN, this whole thing is about freedom and liberty.  How does a libertarian object to a government telling a businessman who he can do business with and then go out and argue that government can tell people who to date and who to marry?  I believe marriage should be defined as a union between a man and a woman.  I also believe that gays have a right to enter into a union (use any word you want to) and insure for themselves the right to the same freedoms, protection and benefits enjoyed in a traditional marriage.

 The Bleacherman has left the stadium…