Maybe it's because I'm not a Chicago-born fan, but my Cubbie blue blood was never bothered by our President Elect's sporting choices. I'd be more bothered by a Cards fan...though admittedly pleased that we'd likely carry Missouri :)
Sorry, I'm not familiar with this practice. DO they actually do something to (or even near) the physical remains? Or is this something done in an LDS church somewhere...well away from any body/remains?
Because I'd have a big problem with #1, but not as much with #2.
While much of what you said certainly reflects the wider problem, I find it hard to see how someone can so easily self-reflect and yet not see the problem with imposing a self-described religious belief on someone else.
It is not government's job to police sin. It is government's job to make illegal those behaviors that are harmful to society to such an extent that it becomes necessary to reduce a freedom to protect the public good. I've seen not an iota of evidence to suggest that gay marriage is such a harmful behavior. Your religious beliefs were also recently used to prevent gay people from adopting children, and the advocates of that policy painted with so broad a religious brush that they also are preventing straight people from adopting, too, provided that they were not married. Perhaps we should consider taking all children away from single parents, since they're so unfit to be fathers or mothers?
I can appreciate the fact that your personal morality dictates a code of conduct to you. Fine. No problem. If you happen to be gay, you can self-impose a "no marriage" restriction. I haven't a single problem with that. But beyond you, your personal morality shouldn't apply in a country with freedom of and from religion.
To extend your logic, a Catholic could have justified voting for anti-Jewish laws, up until the time that the Vatican officially decreed that Jews were not responsible, as a people, for the death of Christ. How ludicrous and bigoted would such voting be?
I think it can be either...it all depends on how much we make those those who didn't previously vote feel that their vote helped. A productive administration means more than any other thing, I think. I hope that this admin leads to a renewed faith in government and a spike in civicness for generations.
To be clear, the blame lies at the feet, in my opinion, of people like Indiana Sec. State Todd Rokita, who's also responsible for making our citizens jump through the additional hoop of photo identification in order to vote.
On his website (http://www.in.gov/sos/), he proudly links to a video of himself on Fox News, decrying the inability of Marion County (Indianapolis) to wipe people off the vote rolls (as other states have done, primarily targeting those who've lost their homes). He also discusses the need to look into left wing (the anchor's words) organizations like ACORN, implying that there was vote buying going on.
The amusing thing is this: Rokita knows very well that the ACORN nonsense is just that. His ID law means that type of fraud can't happen, yet he spouts off his nonsense anyway.
I wouldn't assume McCain would have gotten those votes...some, sure, but not all. Some would've voted for another third party, more likely. But it may mean a plurality win in Montana, rather than a majority, no matter which candidate wins it.