I regret voting against Westly and for Angelides four years ago.
If Westly were running, I'd be the first in line to vote for him.
But all these guys are schmucks, including Newsom, and I may not cast a vote for governor, or worse, I just may get in bed with Whitman or Poizner.
All of these Dem guys are offering same ol', same ol'. We don't need that in CA, and for the first second time in my life, I will vote Republican. (I voted for Poizner against Bustamante for Insurance Commish [I even voted against Bustamante in the primary].)
I know that I shouldn't be saying this on MyDD, but the Dems in Sacramento are wholly uninspiring, are tax-and-fee crazy, and don't know how to handle the wacky Dem legislature here. We need a right balance.
The bottom line is no matter the religious angle, whatever becomes law becomes RIGHT, becomes TRUE, becomes PROPER, becomes SANCTIONED, PERPETUATED AND PROLIFERATED under the law.
What two people do at home is their business, but when their private acts become RIGHT under the law, then those acts become a) normalized, and b) exemplified for others to perpetuate and proliferate.
If gays were truly seeking equality, they wouldn't want others to perpetuate and proliferate their acts but instead they would seek to keep those acts to themselves, in private. Gays essentially already have the right to privacy under the law, so I don't know why they are going the extra step of asking for marriage. The concept of marriage would forever be changed and their private acts would become as public and as appropriate as hetero sex. So sex in a hundred years would go beyond being a choice and instead would become obligatory to find out if you actually prefer sex with men or sex with women.
There's a weird confluence of history and theology going on in your head.
You think theology is subservient to history, but really it's the other way around.
And the law is Mosaic, not "Abrahamic". If you're saying that Abraham is the father of all Jews, then you must have proof that he designed their code of law.
The Bible is a useless baseline?
If anyone is bigoted and prejudiced, it's you.
Don't worry--at the end of the day, I'm still a Democrat, I still believe in fairness, decency and honesty, but I will never subscribe to prejudiced notions like yours which treat religion like a remnant of history.
The Jews were not exposed to the Babylonians until approximately 700 BC, many centuries after Mosaic law was established, so I'm a little confused by your assertion.
I was the first person to cheer when the SCOTUS struck down the anti-sodomy laws. A policeman should not be arresting two men or two women for anything he happens to find them doing in the privacy of their home.
Gay marriage, like heterosexual marriage, instantly becomes a universal concept when it's promulgated in the courts or our legislatures. It becomes something that everyone has to instantly recognize as right. It affects everyone.
I can't speak for others' interpretation of the Bible, but those concepts from the Old Testament which are reiterated in the New Testament (such as homo sex being immoral) are most important. I'm not preaching here, but I'm telling you how Christians view important concepts from the Bible.
The only thing Bush said of any value during his Presidency was that we're all sinners, even those heteros who abuse marriage.
As far as bigotry towards gays, I wouldn't be having this debate with you if I were truly prejudiced.