This is a somewhat-successful first attempt at using YouTube's "Direct Upload" feature, and it's my appeal to California voters to vote against the discriminatory Proposition 8. The audio is out of sync and it cuts off the last sentence, but the bulk of the message is there.
The video cuts off at the end, the last bit was supposed to say "The law is meant to protect the people, not to harm them. Vote No on Prop 8."
Also of note is this video, narrated by Samuel L. Motherfucking Jackson, and describing a little bit more the history of discrimination we should be turning our backs on, not embracing like a long-lost friend.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
An excellent and very logical video showing exactly why the only basis for opposition to Prop. 8 is religious, and therefore invalid.
I hate the fact that this has even been seriously considered.
Knowing this is an emotional issue for you, I'm proud that you created this with a high level of finesse. There are a lot of emotional people out there that get outwardly worked up about the prop, and I'm not necessarily saying that they shouldn't. But a calm and logical approach to all kinds of matters are in short supply these days.
MasterMike, I think you meant that the only basis for supporting Prop 8 is religious. Double-negatives are a joy in legislation.
However, I'm a bit surprised I haven't heard anyone saying that, indeed, the strongest basis for opposition to Prop 8 is religious. Far, FAR more than a civil rights issue, this is a religious rights issue. What's at stake is the right of a religious community to preserve its own rules about what is sacred.
Same-sex-marriage opponents frequently mention that marriage is a sacred institution. True enough. But who makes it sacred?
Religions make it sacred. Religions, plural. There are myriad religious sects in California and across America. And many of those sects -- including large, mainstream, nationwide Christian churches -- sanctify same-sex marriage. It's already sacred. It's not sacred in all churches, but then, neither is Holy Communion. Or baptism. Different religions sanctify different things.
Voting yes for Proposition 8 is voting yes for letting the government make the rules about what's sacred, dictating religious doctrine to the churches. This is a slippery slope, well recognized by the Founders of the country, which is why the Bill of Rights begins with: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."
Where can it go from here?
Catholics: Are you ready for the Protestant majority to enact a Constitutional amendment de-sanctifying Holy Communion? Or prayer to the Blessed Virgin? Or the public display of any image of Christ on the cross? Or rescinding the authority of priests to annul a marriage? What's going to stop them?
Jews: You are already painfully aware what happens when a government starts limiting the rights of a minority.
Muslims: Your religion, unfortunately, is squarely in the crosshairs of neo-conservative American politics. You should be awfully wary of giving demagogues a foot in the door when it comes to outlawing religious practices.
Protestants: What's unique about your sect of Christianity? It's now under review. Brace yourself.
Government should have no place in the creation or abolition of religious doctrine. Proposition 8 is a sledgehammer-blow to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Churches must be free to determine for themselves what they hold sacred.
Yeah, a simple double negative cockup. I consider myself quite an intelligent person - there's going to be quite a few people getting confused when they vote tomorrow.
check out the note i posted on my facebook page. I wrote it before I saw your video but I feel a lot better about the post because we made a lot of the same posts.
I got this link from John Scalzi's blog:
https://secure2.convio.net/laglc/site/Donation2?idb=1227248265&df_id=1900&1900.donation=form1&JServSessionIdr001=kcao68iry3.app2b
Is there anything else a guy in Colorado can do to help reverse this travasty?
Hey there--saw this video on YouTube but couldn't load it there, either. I'd love to see it if you can post it on your blog.
I think St. Chris makes an interesting point. What if the government were to say that Catholic churches had to have women as priests, too, because it was discriminatory not to?
Religions change over time, and they are affected by society (government, law, people, etc.). Polygamy is still outlawed in this country (although still practiced), and there are certainly sects out there that believe African-Americans are dark skinned because they bear "the mark of Cain."
Is Prop 8 really about forcing churches to do same-sex marriages, or is it saying that same-sex marriages are legal and churches, temples, etc. have their own say in whether they perform a religious ceremony sanctifying the union?
The Catholic church can keep women from the priesthood, but they can't prevent women from getting jobs elsewhere. Just curious if this argument would hold true for same-sex marriages.
Thanks for your thought-provoking response.
Take care,
I.
Hi Ivan,
No church would have been forced to perform same-sex marriages if they had been opposed to them -- you don't see Catholic churches performing Hindu marriages, after all.
Prop 8 makes it so that the secular government refuses to recognize the civil institution of marriage.
Post a Comment