This is why we can't have nice things

[soc_puppet]

Goddammit, Maine! I thought you were cool! And then you up and pull shit like this.

We are so over.

*goes to hang out in positive feminist space*

Edit: To quote Liss: This country is not, and never has been, well-served by leaving the civil rights of the minority in the hands of the majority. Putting that up to a vote which is subject to deeply held prejudice is ruling not by democracy, but by mob mentality.

Comments

[inarticulate]

Ugh, those quotes. YES, HOW HEARTBREAKING FOR GAY PEOPLE TO HAVE RIGHTS. ugh ugh ugh.

[soc_puppet]

Oh yes, because having the same rights as anyone else somehow makes you special. Must... resist... urge... to smash...!

[qable.livejournal.com]

That's so depressing. Since when was it a good idea to put civil rights through a popular opinion poll like that? If we'd done that a century ago, women would not have gotten the right to vote.

[soc_puppet]

I know! Civil rights of marginalized groups and minorities should, in no way, be subject to the whims of the privileged majority >:/

[websofseaweed.livejournal.com]

FUCK MAINE. I am so crossing all of the colleges in Maine off of my app list. >:( QUEER ANGER. RAAAWR.

There's also the tax-exempt issue

[c-creevey.livejournal.com]

I think it's hideous that you have _religious_ institutions trying to influence _civil_ marriage.

[soc_puppet]

Grrr, Maine! Well crossed-off, I say! FEEL MY BI WRATH, STUPID DECISION MAKING.

Icon refers to some of the messages put forward by NOM and churches, BTW

[soc_puppet]

I've felt that way for a long, long time. And then there's also this, where we learn that "The measure would put Christian Science prayer treatments -- which substitute for or supplement medical treatments -- on the same footing as clinical medicine." Can we say slippery slope, here?

[morgan-idril.livejournal.com]

siigh, once again the intolerant few ruin it for others. I really think that out of state monies should be banned from interfering with others elections. Damn and blast it all.

[soc_puppet]

I think I might like the idea of capping out-of-state monies better, since it wouldn't surprise me if "No on 1" got some out-of-state funding as well. Not that I know the stats, or anything ^^a

Wow

[c-creevey.livejournal.com]

I would hope it's subject to supervision or we'll end up paying taxes to rid people of thetans too.

So, the IRS states that with a tax-exempt church 'no substantial part of its activity may be attempting
to influence legislation' -http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p1828.pdf I would think you'd need some amazing lawyer not to classify this as a tax violation: http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17112

[cucarache.livejournal.com]

Hmm, you're not going to like this...

Just wait for 2012, when the state constitutional amendment to repeal same sex marriage gets through the political calendar and comes up before the voters of Iowa.

[soc_puppet]

While I'd like to hope they'll get someone on that soon, reality tells me it ain't gonna happen -_-a

[soc_puppet]

Ugh, don't remind me >_< At least we have two years to campaign the heck out of it.

And it probably would fuel the victimhood complex too

[c-creevey.livejournal.com]

You know, Maureen Dowd writes one editorial and suddenly the entire NYTimes, if not the whole culture, is anti-Catholic.

On a more positive note, I came across this essay after its writer spoke to the Gay Christian Network podcast:
http://www.musingson.com/ccCase.html