We are SO fucked.

[kellinator]

This morning I got up almost hopeful. As much as this all sucks, at least it's over. On the drive to work, I was writing a post in my head about all the things we could do to work for a better America.

Then I started reading my friends list and my mood went downhill fast.

Then this afternoon I went to CNN.com and found this:

"I earned capital in the campaign, political capital, and now I intend to spend it."

I went in my boss' office and said about fifteen times that "we are so screwed."

The man has absolutely no intention whatsoever of trying to bring the country together. His version of being "a uniter, not a divider" is that he tells us what to do and we all get behind him like good little sheep.

I started crying this afternoon in a friend's office. When she said "at least you can get married," I cried harder. Why is it that I could run off to Vegas, pick up some guy I've never seen before, and marry him, and she can't marry the woman she's loved and been faithful to for years and years? It's just wrong.

And for all of you who think homosexuality is Wrong and just the biggest sin you can commit (ahead of killing, lying, and a bunch of other things that actually made the Ten Commandments), all I have to say is: If you think gay sex is wrong, well then don't have it. But you've got no right to tell anyone else they can't. That's between them and God.

I went to a debate on same-sex marriage at Vandy a few years ago. The pro people all got up and said "we're not talking about religious marriage, we don't want to tell any religious group what to do, we're just talking about civil marriage rights." Then the con people got up and screamed about religious marriage for two hours. They're not listening.

Some of you who voted for Bush seem not to understand why this is so upsetting to many of us on the left. If Kerry had been elected, you would still have a voice in politics. The Republican majorities would ensure that. But now, with the Republicans fully in charge of everything and about to start stacking the judiciary, and with Bush's history of saying he'll be a uniter and then doing whatever he damn well pleases, we have no reason to believe that we'll be listened to. We have no reason to believe that we even matter anymore. We're like strangers in a strange land, wondering what's going to be taken from us next.

I've seen that some polyamourous bisexual people voted for Bush because they liked his tax cuts. In all honesty, what are you thinking? Have you not noticed the man's stance on Puritanical morality? Don't think you'll be exempted from his judgment because you voted for him.

I'm so scared. I tried so hard -- so many of us did. But proven facts were no match for the Cult of Bush. Can't you see? It's not about losing. It's about fearing for the American way of life.

Comments

I can understand...

[cotharyus.livejournal.com]

your distress over the ideas. Let me make a few points:

1) I have lots of GLBT friends. They know my stance - I think the bible says it's wrong. However, I don't shoot gay people. If I saw someone killing someone for no apparently reason, they'd probly get hurt. I don't understand why everyone things that a christian is going to damn them to hell for being gay. Talk about tollerance - the bible tells me it's wrong, but that I should love you anyway. And I have no reason not to, and I don't believe that a gay person will go to hell if they're saved - saved is saved - but that's religion, I'm just talking about what I think.

2) Same sex marriges I don't understand - I wouldn't vote against them if it was on a ballet, and I don't think Bush is going to institute a national no-same-sex-marriage ammendment. I just don't think he's that into attacking Americans, or thier rights. The same goes for religious freedoms. It just so happens that the founding fathers of our country were christians, and used christian principles, but maintained religious freedom was something everyone should have. As a result, feel free to practice wicca, christianity, unitarianism, or whatever, right out in the open. I even think you should be allowed to practice in school, as long as it isn't disruptive. Prayer is not disruptive. America was founded on the idea of tollerance. If it's not harming someone else, it's fine, even if I don't like it.

What's it going to take to make everyone realize that government is still under the voter's control?

Re: I can understand...

[branwynelf.livejournal.com]

and I don't think Bush is going to institute a national no-same-sex-marriage ammendment. I just don't think he's that into attacking Americans, or thier rights.

Where exactly have you been the last four years? He's been LOBBYING for a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriages. He may not get it passed in the next four years, but I sincerely doubt it will be for lack of trying.

As for not attacking peoples' rights ... um, right. So there's no Patriot Act? There's no federal "no fly" list? There's no extension of National Guard tours of duty on the grounds of his "war on terror" which has nothing to do with 9/11 anymore, and which is sending people who signed up to protect the homefront to the battlefront.

Nope, no rights taken away or under attack there. None at all. But hey, at least rich white straight folks' lives will only get better, and really that's all that matters, eh?

Re: I can understand...

[sujata.livejournal.com]

Thank you. :-)

Worshipfully,
Molly!

Re: I can understand...

[cotharyus.livejournal.com]

I should be clearer. I don't think bush will *get* that ammendment instituted, no matter how hard he tries. I could be wrong, in which case I would hope it's repealed. This was not an issue at the forefront of my mind when I made a choice about who to vote for - because it's not him saying you *can't* have a lifelong bond with a samesex partner, it's just a legal thing. How far will I push that? Pretty far, just keep your eyes on me.

Again, don't think I'm trolling or flaming or anything else. I have a pretty good idea of how government works - I'll stick with Bush getting that amendment passed is a longshot.

Re: I can understand...

[sujata.livejournal.com]

it's not him saying you *can't* have a lifelong bond with a samesex partner

No, he'll leave that to the Supreme Court. He'll wait 'til he's appointed replacements for the Justices who will be retiring in the next four years, first, so as to stack the court with right-wing bigots just like himself. And then they'll overturn Lawrence v. Texas, which last year struck down the sodomy statutes that were used to make same-sex partnering criminal.

You don't think he'll push it that far, or that a Bush-stacked USSC won't? Just keep your eyes on them.

it's just a legal thing

*slaps forehead* Doh!

Sorry, my bad. You're right.

And that Constitution whatsit-thingy? Yeah, that's "just a legal thing," too.

No worries, right? Wrong.

I'll stick with Bush getting that amendment passed is a longshot.

*wince*

So loss of mine and other GLBT people's civil rights is a risk you're willing to take, huh?

And what happens if you're shocked and dismayed to find that you were wrong, and he gets that amendment enacted? I get your humble apology?

I hate to say it, but that won't mean much.

Listen, I know you're maighdlin's fella. So you must be a good guy at heart ... even though you seem to think I'm going to hell because I'm non-heterosexual. That's a bit tough for me to wrap my head around; I can't understand why you'd worship a God so unfair as to create me in God's own image, which includes an attraction to both women and men going all the way back to when I was five years old (you don't really think five-year-olds decide to be queer because it's just so cool to be a rebel, do you?), and then damn me for a sexual orientation I had absolutely no choice in. But if you're okay with that, I doubt there's really anything I can say to change your mind.

The thing is, though, I just wish millions of heterosexuals hadn't regarded me as a sacrifice they're willing to make. Because, you know, I'd die to defend their right to love who they love and marry who they love, and I'd even die to defend their right to condemn me for being who I am. To feel no obligation whatsoever to return the favor, just a little, by voting against these amendments to state constitutions prohibiting same-sex couples from marrying? It's not fair.

And worse, it's cruel.

If that's not enough, then what I'd like to know is, where are all the rational self-centered people in America? Why don't they at least realize that if they sit by and do nothing while one minority after another is disenfranchised, eventually it's going to be them that's stripped of one or more liberties? And there will be no one to come to their defense, because everyone else has already been eliminated.

Rather like that Nazi Germany quote, isn't it?

Re: I can understand...

[cotharyus.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't even have come back to this except for one thing. I 'll address that first. You wrote:

So you must be a good guy at heart ... even though you seem to think I'm going to hell because I'm non-heterosexual.

Wrong. I said saved is saved. To God, my inability to keep a civil tongue in my head is probly more of a sin than homosexuality, because I do occasionally take his name in vain. To God, in the old testament, *any* sin was worthy of eternal death. But as you so rightly pointed out, we are under the New Covanent - Christ's sacrifice for our sins. It's a gift, like he handed you a "get out of hell free" card, all you have to do is accept it. I'm not preaching to you - I'm telling you that I don't think you have to go to hell because your homosexual, I never did. I'm not sure where you got the idea, and I just want to make sure you understand me.

I really don't want to address the rest of this. Not because I have nothing to say about it, feel defeated, or anything like that. Just because in a minute you're going to wise up and ask me - if I say there's a chance that someone *could* tell you that you *can't* be homosexual, and I think that would be wrong for them to do it - what would posses me to vote for Bush? I'm suprised no one has asked yet. The end result of the question is that I wouldn't answer. Everyone would think I needed to be locked up in a rubber room. But in the long run, I'm willing to bet I was right. If a time comes, when something totally unimaginable happens, and we only have one way out - and I say "I told you so." - you're welcome to say "No, you didn't.". But then you'll know I wasn't crazy.

[branwynelf.livejournal.com]

That clarification makes a huge difference to what I thought you were saying, however I do still believe that if you support a man who tries to make such a change (even if you believe he'll be unsuccessful), it's still giving him power. He's already claimed he has gained political currency to forward his agendas thanks to the election, and I worry mightily about what he WILL succeed in doing - be it this issue or any of the multitude of others that he's already started the ball rolling on.

Re: I can understand...

[sujata.livejournal.com]

(1) The Old Testament says it's wrong. But that was the old covenant between God and the Hebrews. Jesus of Nazareth died by crucifixion to usher in the new covenant, as documented by the New Testament. Nor did Jesus ever say it's wrong.

And here's a shocker for you: Jesus was the most socially liberal man in the world, at that time, and one of the most tolerant people Of All Time. The man hung out with tax collectors, lepers, and prostitutes, the scourge of society in that culture and that era. Bet you a Second Coming would see him return as a gay man. Or a lesbian. What better way to test who actually lives the values he taught, and who doesn't?

(2) Dude. Where have you been? Bush has already tried to amend the Constitution to ban same-sex marriages. He's very much into attacking Americans and their rights. You're either with him or against him, remember?

Me, I'm against him.

And I'm against this vision he has of an America that is conformist, oppressive, and exclusive. Our Founding Fathers meant our nation to be built on principles of freedom, respect, and inclusion.

Either we've forgotten that, or too many of us just don't care any more, as long as they get theirs. I don't care which.

But I believe a Power that could create the universe surely must have more important concerns than the gender of whomever I love. I believe I live an honorable, compassionate, spiritual life and that God will reward me accordingly. I believe Jesus would be bitterly disappointed in people who think God is as narrow-minded as they are, and that they're better than me just because they get their sexual jollies by inserting Tab A into Slot B and I get mine mostly from fellow Slot B's.

If I'm wrong, let me answer to God for it. Human beings should neither know nor care what I and a consenting adult do in private.

And I agree with what Kelly wrote yesterday. Remember the Pharisees in the Bible? They weren't the good guys. True Christians should stop acting like them.

Respectfully,
Molly

P.S. Prayer is not disruptive, I agree. But the Founding Fathers also quite clearly believed the best policy, for both church and state, is separation of church and state. Why? If you allow one into the other, no matter how innocent your intentions, you open the door to someone not at all innocent using that as a springboard to turn your democratic republic into a theocratic tyranny.

Re: I can understand...

[cotharyus.livejournal.com]

on (1) - you're right. You're right, and you're right. Did you notice that I said I had gay friends? I don't lump people into groups. Everyone I meet - EVERYONE - gets a fair shake. You have to screw yourself out of my friendship.

You'll notice I said I think a GLBT that's saved is saved - that's the new testament. The bible still says it's wrong, that's just me. I've never told my friends they can't be gay, it's not my job. My job is to be what I feel like I should be. Does that make sense? I don't presume to tell someone what to do, and expect the same in return. People from all walks of life could get along if they simply made a choice to understand each other. My point is, I choose to be understanding, my views being my views, but I won't make anyone else conform to them.

about (2) See my response to the comment above. Also note that I am one of the biggest opponents of the patriot act. Being more technically savy than most people, I understand the implications of some of the looser language in it that other people think is harmless. Never mind all the banking laws is screwed with. Given that information, consider one of two (or both) things - A)I see something horrific about Kerry that made me not vote for him or B) there is something very important that bush stands for that made me vote for him Despite his obvious problems. I've said all along, all we can hope for is the best of a bad lot.

I don't think schools have anything to do with separation of church and state. I agree that they should be separate though, however, bear in mind that they can only be separated so far. Many of this country's laws are firmly rooted in Christian morals. I think Thou shalt not kill is a good example. I won't get into a philisophical/religious debate about law though. Religion should be left out of it.

Re: I can understand...

[stevietee.livejournal.com]

Killing isn't against the law because it's in the Ten Commandments -- killing infringes (permanently) on the rights of another person.

Re: I can understand...

[kellinator.livejournal.com]

One thing here I really have to take issue with:

It just so happens that the founding fathers of our country were christians

Not totally. More than a few (including George Washington) were Deists.

Re: I can understand...

[flewellyn.livejournal.com]

Yes, and it doesn't even matter what religion the founding fathers professed. They wrote the First Amendment as such, and meant it. They knew the dangers of too much religiosity in the public sphere.
So, regardless of whether our founders were Christians, this is not a "Christian Nation".