Does anyone really care that the Vatican now says that "gays aren't criminals?"

Thank you, Vatican. Reasonable people already know that, even if more than 87 countries (and many municipalities in the United States) continue to criminalize homosexuality.

This should be good news that Vatican is on the right side on issue for once... right?

Ah.. no.

"The Church is in favour of decriminalising homosexuality," Lombardi said. But it opposes granting "parity of rights", such as marriage. According to Catholic teaching, only unions between a man and a woman can be accorded such parity.

Here's my big middle finger to your Catholic teaching. Actually, here's both. Your "teaching" is backwards. Wrong. Discriminatory. And it's immoral.

Yes, immoral.

Of course, positioning itself as the advocate of equality, the Vatican, opposes "all forms of discrimination."

Unless, it's gay marriage of course. No parity of marriage for you, f ag.  

My irony meter broke on that one.


(Source)

From the executive, to the House, to the Senate, Republicans were soundly defeated across the board in Tuesday's election, giving the legislative edge to the Democratic Party.

A landslide of Democratic proportions happened.

Flashback

Flashback to 2004, after the defeat of Senator John Kerry by the incumbent George Bush, I can still recall being lectured by Sean Hannity on television, in condescending tones explaining why the Democrats lost. Hannity repeatably pointed to the post-electoral map of the United States, convincingly engulfed in a sea of red, telling us to " look at it Democrats."

Why did the Democratic Party lose so? Hannity stated that the Democrats lost because the United States is a "center right" nation and implied that the liberal values of the Democratic party were now out of step with mainstream America and the map showed that liberalism had been irrecoverably invalidated in the US of A.

Yep, as far back as 2004 the myth of the "center right" had begun.

Hannity, look at the map.

Former Wisconsin Governor and presidential hopeful, Tommy Thompson, accurately described the electoral map as "The whole thing is blue!" And regarding our state, "Wisconsin is the bluest of the blue!”

I'm not here to rub in the Democratic victory because I remember how I felt in 2004, however if we are to apply Hannity's argument, Republicans – you are out of step with mainstream America.

But you see, I'm not a blockhead like Hannity. I don't believe that for a second that republicanism is dead. 

I Wish I Knew How to Quit You

Republicans, as you begin rebuild your party after all the finger pointing has finished...please, do not  talk, walk, marry, or dress like a liberal.

I, we, America, needs you the way you are. In fact, if going more to the right, more conservative, thinks that helps you as some pundits suggests, by all means, go further to the right.

You are the opposition after all, sometimes vile and sometimes grudgingly correct, but opposition nonetheless. I love you just the way you are – in all your regressive splendor – especially on social issues.  

Stay the course. Don't become liberals. 

Liberals, please do not become conservatives under the false perception that you must to do so to maintain your majorities. 

Myths Exposed

There is no center and there is no moderate - there is no monolithic mainstream when matter of social priority involved. Because a majority of people agree on an issue, it does not make the belief correct.

If you believe that gays can marry or have civil unions - then you are on the left. If you believe that gays can not and approve of legal bans against it, you are on the right. There is no middle ground. There is no center. There are no moderates where these issues are concerned.

You are either pregnant or your not.

Yet, that does not stop politicians and pundits from making this un-nuanced, broad appeal to popularity.

In Conclusion

Democrats and liberals did not win largely on social policies and values as the ballot initiatives in various states illustrate, but on more pressing concerns of the economy, domestic policy, and foreign policy.

It is those issues which the nation has shifted left. Went blue. Shifted liberal.

Civil rights for gays and homosexuals, abortion rights, sits firmly in the clutches of the right. Shifted toward the social conservatives. Went red.

And the "center" - be damned.

While a liberal may have won the presidency – take comfort social conservatives, discrimination is alive and well.

The more I reflect on that every single gay marriage ban passed – especially California's Proposition 8, the election of Barack Obama has somewhat tarnished for me.

Frankly, this morning, I am quite disappointed and angry.

Quite angry.

Undeniably, social conservatism is grounded in Christianity, with the Holy Bible, the most strident in its laws proclaiming death sentences for homosexuality. The Bible is the unquestionable authority for the bigot, the social conservative, to wrap himself up in tribal laws of bronze-age people disguised today as the love of Jesus.

Ironically, exit polls in California demonstrate that it was African-Americans who voted in higher numbers to ban gay marriage. African-Americans are proportionally self-identified higher as Christian than other racial groups, with maybe the exception of Hispanics. How quickly are the lessons of Loving vs Virgina have been forgotten?

I thought we lived in a secular society? I guess not.

Proposition 8 was mainly bankrolled by the Mormon Church and other right wing religious groups.

The wall between church and state continues to crumble, taking democracy, liberty and equality for its citizens with it.

That's what these gay marriage bans betray.

So good job. You have successfully enacted laws – state constitutional amendments no less, to remove a citizen's rights.

And you have established right-wing Christianity, over other forms of Christianity who embrace homosexuality.

So congratulations social conservatives and its enablers - you're bringing us closer and closer to theocracy.

Regardless, who you voted for in this election, if you voted to discriminate against gays and lesbians, you are a bigot.

A shameful, fearful, bigot.

One of the first things I learned about politics, sitting in Mr Rupnow's current events class during my sophomore year of high school at Kettle Moraine, is that America historically elects only w.a.s.p's for president.

We just elected the first African-American President of the United States of America, I said, as I held my wife's hand watching Senator Obama's acceptance speech.

Amazing!

Yet, during the night as I watched the returns, I held my breath until enough states went blue and Obama could take a commanding electoral lead. I could not forget the Kerry defeat of 2004. For the first 90 minutes, McCain lead with one southern state after another capitulating red, beginning with Kentucky. Electorally, that was no problem if Obama could eat into some of the states which have voted republican in the past, like Ohio and Florida - which he did seemingly without effort.

When Charlie Gibson called the election quietly and almost non-nonchalantly for Obama, there was a moment of silence until my wife and I realized what he just said.

My wife and I promptly celebrated with a $4.99 bottle of champagne.

While its fantastic that Obama did indeed win – by an electoral landslide no less, and McCain conceded as honorably as he did, there is still much work that liberals need to do in raising social consciousness of how we should regulate social policy administrated by our government..

On that note, one the most evocative moments last night was watching the interview with Congressmen Jim Sensensbrenner at the Ryan campaign – who was re-elected over the less crazier choice of Constitution Party candidate... what's his name... Raymond? To the interviewer, Sensenbrenner stated something to the effect, that in order for Republicans to once again lead, they had to return to a party of low taxes and fiscal responsibly, good governance, and true social conservative values.

I wonder what Sensensbrenner meant by "true social conservative values." If "true social conservative values" is legislating policy predicated upon a religious worldview - then I'm afraid I won't be voting Republican anytime soon.

Presently, the Republican party is largely a party of social conservatives. The culture wars that social conservatives purposely engage in, like the banning of gay marriage or civil unions, creationism versus evolution, threatening a woman's health where abortion is concerned, religion over science, drug policy, are really just a whole host of quasi-religious or outright religious principles.

Republicans actively crusade for these principles at the behest of churches or religious right advocacy groups – forever negating the concept of small government by legislating these religious values and imposing them onto our collective freedom of conscious.

I do agree with the opinions of other pundits who state that this country is center-right, if not in economics and regulation, at least in the sphere of the social values I listed above. The banning of gay marriage in Arizona, Florida, and at time of writing this as returns trend, California – illustrates that liberals have much work to do in achieving equality for a class of citizens and restraining government off our bodies and in the choices that we make in our relationships, and the beliefs we wish to, or not, ascribe to.

This is why I admired McCain when he stridently stood up to the religious right, a key base of the GOP as the "agents of intolerance." If our democracy is to survive, it must not function as camouflage for one religion over another - even if that religion is one idiosyncratic variety of a larger whole.

That is why liberals, in this regard, are functionally libertarians – that is, more like true social conservatives then social conservatives are. Liberals are more prone to maintain and fight for the boundaries between religion and secularity.

Personally, my libertarianism expresses my social liberalism which in turn is informed by Humanism and the secular nature of our Constitution. Science, for me, illuminates reality, where religion only substitutes superstition and unfounded and untestable notions on reality.

Where will the Republican party go after this? Where will the Democratic party go after this?

I do not know, but I do have hope.

But it is clear to me, that both parties have a long way to go on these social issues.

Democrats are closer, while Republicans are far from it.

Connecticut ruled today in a 4-3 decision that Connecticut state constitution can not ban same sex couples from marriage.

On the ruling, Justice Richard N. Palmer stated that:

"To decide otherwise would require us to apply one set of constitutional principles to gay persons and another to all others," Palmer wrote.

That's a great point which refutes the argument by social conservatives that same-sex couples are asking for special, exceptional rights.

The ruling also went on to further demonstrate that civil unions are not legally the same as marriage. That's perhaps the biggest consequence of this decision.

On the decision:

"I can't believe it. We're thrilled, we're absolutely overjoyed. We're finally going to be able, after 33 years, to get married," said Janet Peck of Colchester, who was a plaintiff with her partner, Carole Conklin.

Slowly, but surely, Americans are coming to realize that banning same-sex marriage is not only un-Constitutional, but pure discrimination. Banning same-sex marriage abrogates our shared American sense of fairness for all our citizens.

Stay tuned for the social-conservatives who will undoubtedly surface denouncing this court ruling with their usual quasi-religious or religious bigotry to discriminate against gay couples, wrapped up in the right-wing venom of traditionalism.

Wisconsin, you should be ashamed of yourself.

(Source)