Posts
I know that yesterday's post featured Pat Robertson as well, but he's had a really good week - if by "good" one means "jaw-droppingly ridiculous," as is often the case here on Augoeides. In response to a judge's ruling that a florist had acted in a discriminatory manner by refusing to provide flowers for a same-sex wedding, the television evangelist basically lost it and went on a rant about polygamists and people marrying dogs.
My first thought is that the florist should be happy to get all that business. After all, she's in it to make a profit, right? The idea that a person can "sin by association" is one of the dumbest ideas in the whole fundamentalist worldview. Presumably if a same-sex couple is getting married, they don't share the florist's beliefs. So what? It's not like the florist is committing a sin by marrying a same-sex partner. She's just selling them flowers.
The argument here is exactly the same as that made years ago by a group of Muslim cab drivers here in Minneapolis who refused to drive anyone who had alcohol on their possession, which at the time was rightly pillaried by conservatives like Robertson. Islam prohibits the drinking of alcohol, not simply being near a bottle of it. The cab drivers were eventually forced to comply with the law, which states that they cannot refuse a fare in such a discriminatory manner.
The reality is that if you could commit a sin just by doing business with someone who is, the entire American economy would be screwed from a fundamentalist perspective. Poor people are exploited to some degree by just about every financial transaction that passes through the economy, and Jesus said a lot more about exploiting the poor than he did about same-sex relationships. The only possibly anti-gay quotes in the New Testament are from Paul.
Also, why is it that fundamentalists are so obsessed with bestiality? They seem to think that everyone out there is just clamboring to marry their pets, and only the bulwark of godly laws stand between civilization and widespread man-on-dog love. Is this a common fundamentalist fantasy or something?
“To say that some procedural anomaly in the statute overrides the fundamental religious freedoms of the people, it’s just crazy,” he insisted. “And I hope that the lawyers for this florist will appeal this thing to get into the federal courts.”
“But this is outrageous!” the conservative preacher continued. “To tell a florist that she’s got to provide flowers for a particular kind of wedding. What if somebody wanted to marry his dog? She’s got to have flowers for that? What if there’s a polygamous situation where a guy has five wives and he wants to have five ceremonies, and she’s going to be forced by the law to provide them flowers. I mean, this is crazy.”
My first thought is that the florist should be happy to get all that business. After all, she's in it to make a profit, right? The idea that a person can "sin by association" is one of the dumbest ideas in the whole fundamentalist worldview. Presumably if a same-sex couple is getting married, they don't share the florist's beliefs. So what? It's not like the florist is committing a sin by marrying a same-sex partner. She's just selling them flowers.
The argument here is exactly the same as that made years ago by a group of Muslim cab drivers here in Minneapolis who refused to drive anyone who had alcohol on their possession, which at the time was rightly pillaried by conservatives like Robertson. Islam prohibits the drinking of alcohol, not simply being near a bottle of it. The cab drivers were eventually forced to comply with the law, which states that they cannot refuse a fare in such a discriminatory manner.
The reality is that if you could commit a sin just by doing business with someone who is, the entire American economy would be screwed from a fundamentalist perspective. Poor people are exploited to some degree by just about every financial transaction that passes through the economy, and Jesus said a lot more about exploiting the poor than he did about same-sex relationships. The only possibly anti-gay quotes in the New Testament are from Paul.
Also, why is it that fundamentalists are so obsessed with bestiality? They seem to think that everyone out there is just clamboring to marry their pets, and only the bulwark of godly laws stand between civilization and widespread man-on-dog love. Is this a common fundamentalist fantasy or something?
No comments:
Post a Comment