Impediments versus Inevitabilities

Are most conservatives Christians? Because many of them say that they are. I am not naïve in thinking all – what’s the number everyone is throwing around, 11 million – of the illegal immigrants in this country want to do right by others in seeking immigration. But, I do believe many if not a great many of them wish to. First off, people from both sides need to stop speaking of immigrants synonymously with Central or South Americans. Immigrants come from all over. When you consider in certain countries teenage girls having to move hours away from their families, from villages, to a factory in a big city so that they could make peanuts working twelve-hour-plus days, live in a veritable closet upstairs from the factory-floor, get minuscule breaks, and even go as far as having a supervisor close-pin their eyelids to their eyebrows so that they don’t fall asleep while stitching hems on jeans that we end up buying for $27, why would they want to readily escape this for a better life in some first-world haven? Granting asylum to everyone just as putting all immigrants currently here illegally on a line of buses that would comprise of most of California’s coast is not the answer if we are going to base the seekers upon amoral policies, or obviously if they themselves are amoral.

And when it comes to expressing religious perspective, the views of the Jeneane Garofalo’s on the left and the Phil Robertson’s on the right both piss me off. If you do right by yourself, and others, whether your morality stems from God, or not, it’s all good. This, for now, is the one and only right thing to believe.

It is perfectly valid for anyone to express any view, but it is not accurate to say when we speak about religion in this country, as well as abroad, that we are speaking in terms of moral relativism. Quite simply, rather, it is a fear from moral cohesion. …I read the Bible. A LOT of crazy stuff going on in the Old Testament (difficult to get through, in fact), which of course led to among other laws the creation of the fifteen – oy – ten! commandments. Just as many so-called Christians should not ignore a whole section between the Old Testament and the book of Revelations, they simply cannot cherry-pick what to believe in as good for business. Why aren’t there more chains like Hobby Lobby who remain closed on Sundays in recognition of Exodus 35:2, or who fight like they had and won to legally disallow providing birth control in their health care plans in interpretation of Exodus 20:13 (or, Exodus 23:7, Leviticus 24:17, and so forth)? Because, those other organizations choose to remain morally flexible.

Regardless, there is no apocalypse. We are not heading back to those pre-Ten Commandments days, because we all live according to the laws of a democracy. Freedom of religion certainly includes freedom from religion. Yet this all goes beyond so-called Christians ignoring the teachings of Christ. The governor of Indiana is now getting the hint on this, for instance, though naturally he also blames ‘the media’ in a flimsy attempt to safeguard his political aspirations. He actually signed into law what the governor of Arizona vetoed, and is also being tossed around in other states. I never heard of conversion therapy until just the other day, which several states legally allow therapists to practice. But whether it is a legal form of child abuse, discrimination, or murder like the wacko-lawyer in California is looking to propose indiscriminately against gays in that state, there is a simple solution here. Has any legal authority in the history of this country put to death someone for wearing a garment made of two different threads; a homeowner for planting a vegetable and a fruit side by side in their garden; for working on the day of the Sabbath? Either be willing to re-introduce these things because the Bible says so or stop discriminating against LGBTs.

Homophobia, at the bare minimum, is fundamentally not a bad thing to fess up to. So many kids these days have gay parents. Therefore, like all social phobias based on skin-color, gender, as well as religion and sexual orientation, they are all easily, fundamentally defined as just a lack of familiarization with someone different than you.

When it comes to seemingly every issue in this country, we live in a moral haze. It is making me cray. I cannot blame the mainstream-media for being shallow, when you consider the source of both candidates and incumbents who ‘debate’ for public office treating us like children. So, we go on laughing and crying in a nation afraid to debate actual ideas. With short attention-spans, we largely prefer to live moment-to-moment; prefer not wanting to upset advertisers, campaign-donors, whom we work for, or the general fear of becoming unjustly discriminated against in our delicate communities. We largely tend to keep shallowly entrenched in our extremes, with little regard towards a middle ground, as it becomes increasingly more difficultly and crazily about money over morals. I cannot help but not believe in this.

The Toothpick is Mightier Than the Sacrificed Lamb

Wow. This past Thursday, the Arizona state legislature passed a law which awaited the signature or veto of the governor on whether to permit businesses to refuse service to gays based on “religious principles”. The legislation was placed on the governor’s desk, on Monday, upon which she has until this coming Saturday to decide whether to sign or veto. Arizona’s U.S. senators, John McCain and Jeff Flake, both urged the governor to veto. Apple began back-peddling their plans to build a plant in the state. The Super Bowl was threatening to leave (just like they did about fifteen years ago when the state did not want to recognize MLK Day, and the state, then, reportedly lost hundreds of millions in revenue).

But, as the tide of protest continued to get bigger and bigger, thank goodness the governor did not for any reason wait until the weekend to decide to veto.

Since most politicians rather willfully shy away from educating, before simply cutting to the heart of the tedious, Leviticus 18:22/Old Testament debate debunking the “religious principles” claim, given how cynically nutty this particular piece of legislation was, we ought to first air out a few civil liberty quandaries (when legislation like this will come up, again)…

For one: how would one know if a potential customer is gay?! How awkward would it be if a teenager, out with his parents, is refused service by an unwise proprietor despite not yet coming out? …I would love to stop at any a gas station in the state and reply, ‘Hey, biologists and anthropologists say that the vast majority of us heterosexuals are to some extent bisexual. This includes you, Dwight. So, $25 on 2.’

How perverse is it to leave it up to the law to decide what is ‘burdensome’ to the business person’s religious beliefs? Would gay residents of Arizona ultimately have to be registered to wear a yellow (or, pink) star, like the Jews had to wear in concentration camps, to be ensured potential discrimination from business? If a general physician became known for refusing gay patients, one could go in for a prostate exam and then share when it is over, “By the way, doc, I’m gay, and you just had your hand up my ass!”

Arizona is one of five states that allows its general public a no license or permit (or, “Unrestricted”) concealed/carry handgun policy, as well as upholding a Stand Your Ground/Castle Doctrine which extends coverage to any place in the state where a person has a right to be. So, if discriminated against (or, not), where deadly force is threatened (or, not), said person could shoot the discriminator and legally claim self-defense. It seems like interpreting public policy in Arizona is a bit like knowing how to play poker… or, Russian-roulette. Long live the wild west.

The argument from those who support this legislation is that businesses would simply, legally be protected to “politely” refuse transacting with presumed gays. It is perfectly astonishing, even more so now in the Information Age, how a conformed brainwashing can lend to an inability to see the discriminatory element (let alone, overlook the separation of church of state factor, which a] separates us from the countries we choose to continue to coldly and hotly war against, and b] hypocritically smacks the idea of less federal government in the forehead).

People might look at religious/social conservatives and say or think something to the effect of, ‘You can never change them.’ Wrong. Facts open people’s eyes. They do mine.

As for the “religious principle”, it has been proven that children who have gay parents become so acclimated to the normalcy of living among gays and gay couples, they therefore do not grow up discriminating against gays. Or, to put it as one sign at a not-too-long-ago same-sex rally, proudly, and rightly, said: “Jesus had two daddies!” I would see gay couples at the Catholic church I used to regularly attend and feel a profound sense of relief.

Intellectually, as well as sociologically, just about everyone alive now in the U.S. has been acclimated to both having come to reject as well as accept several passages/ideas written in the Old Testament. We accept the biggies, like not murdering, stealing, et cetera, while rejecting planting two different crops side by side or wearing a garment made from two different threads as being punishable by death. One of the very ten commandments dictates Christians should not work on the day of the Sabbath. Multiply roughly 50 Sundays per year times the 26 years I have been legally working, and I and others ought to be worried about being stoned to death. We can safely agree there are actual, deeper and darker, hierarchical sins going amorally unfrisked and unacknowledged in our current day.

In a nutshell, refusing equal rights for gays just because it is written in the Bible – or otherwise referred to as ‘religious principles’ – is simply means to hide behind one’s homophobia.