No More Mister Nice Gays
Third-tier law school professor and first-tier wingnut, Todd Zywicki, outdoes himself with his latest post over at the reliably wrong-headed Volokh Conspiracy
So let me get this right–those who are upset about the passage of Proposition 8 in California have decided that the thing to do is to pick on the Mormons? So one marginalized group decides that the way to go is to vent their outrage against another marginalized group in society? Unbelieveable.
Professor Zywicki has apparently been too busy filling his cheek pouches with Cheetos and watching TruTV to have learned that the Mormons weren’t exactly a randomly-picked target, not to mention that they are about as marginalized as, oh, I don’t know, the Marriott family. But total ignorance of the facts doesn’t deter Professor Zywicki from treading boldly forward into his own delusional world.
Relying on Exit Polls are dicey, of course.
But don’t let that stop you from relying on them, Professor. (Note that basic comprehension of the rules of subject-verb agreement is not a requirement to be a professor at George Mason Law School.)
But according to the Exit Polls, the decisive difference in Proposition 8’s passage was two reasons. First, 70% of black voters supported it. … The second group that strongly supported Prop 8 appear [Oopsies! More pesky subject-verb issues – Ed.] to be Married [sic] people with children under the age of 18. … [W]ho is going to stick up for the Mormons? Other than that vast and powerful well-oiled Mormon political machine that launched Mitt Romney into the White House this year, of course.
This is utterly shameful behavior. I understand why the losers on Proposition 8 are frustrated. But scapegoating the Mormons simply because it is politically-correct [Wayward hypen alert! – Ed.] to single them out is really over the line.
Could this fuckwit really be any more clueless? Teh gays didn’t go after the Mormons because they wear silly underwear and believe that they inherit their own planets when they die. No, they did it because the Mormon church bankrolled the campaign for Proposition 8.
Then comes the update to end all updates after somebody apparently told Zywicki that the Mormons weren’t randomly selected by teh gays as the object of protest:
Update:
I should have noted that given the unusual history of Mormons in the United States and their periodic struggles with polygamist schism groups, it is easy to understand why the mainstream Mormon Church would have a particular interest in opposing efforts to weaken the traditional definition of marriage.
Zywicki is joking, right? Does he really believe that because the Mormons used to believe in polygamy, and because some still do, that gives them a right to tell other people who they can and can’t marry? No, it only gives them the right to tell other Mormons that they have to divorce one wife before they can marry a second. And that beer, wine, booze, coffee, tea, Pepsi, Coca-Cola, Red Bull and plural wives are all equally forbidden at the reception. And then they can leave everybody else’s weddings the fuck alone, particularly ones that just involve two people.
I do believe “Prof.” Z-icky needs a little speshul attention from us militant queers just about now. Re-education camp could do wonders for the pathetic, sniveling, hate-filled excuse for a human being.
periodic struggles with polygamist schism groups
“periodic” being from their founding until 1890 when polygamy threatened Utah’s prospective statehood, and “schism” being ALL OF THEM.
That is also why the Church of Box Turtle Fucking (Reformed) was so enthusiastic about Prop 8.
Todd Zywicki has also uncovered evidence that many of the gay people who opposed Proposition 8 are gay.
Yes, it are. It really, really are.
Boycott the fuck out of them – Do the Mormon’s still control Dole canneries?
But smashing them for polygamy makes no sense to me. LDS are proud of the fact that they REJECTED polygamy before they were viewed as legit. So declaring that gay marriage is like multiple marriage actually confirms their stupid ass beliefs – if gays would let go of the marriage thingee, they’d be mainstreamed.
I mean, we shouldn’t be asking them to re-examine polygamy at this point and it sounds like we are.
Hit ’em where it hurts. 1) drain their pocketbooks 2) challenge their tax exempt status (it’ll never happen but let’s show ’em we mean business) and 3) compare this law they supported to the anti-miscegenation laws.
And – oh yeah – fuck the Knights of Columbus. Do they want a piece of this TOO?!?!?!
Todd Zywicki has also uncovered evidence that many of the gay people who opposed Proposition 8 are gay.
Gays are like the only demographic in the country that became more republican this year. WTF is that about.
Gays are like the only demographic in the country that became more republican this year. WTF is that about.
RAAAAAACISM
Sadly, it is also true that some same-sex marriage backers in California now seem to engage in racist behavior. Yet, somehow, that doesn’t seem to upset the good Professor – in fact he seems to perceive a lack of racism in the protests.
Aside: really, what the hell is up with law schools. From Harvard (Dershy) to Berkeley (Yoo) to Wisconsin and Tennessee to George Mason, they apparently have no standards at all.
RAAAAAACISM
That’s one answer, but I’m wondering if that’s where the PUMA’s were coming from (and the first answer could possible overlap with this theory).
Yes, it are. It really, really are.
Heh. Which of these is correct?
Wrestling midgets is dangerous, or
Wrestling midgets are dangerous?
If he’s a first-tier Wingnut why have I not heard of him before? WHY.
I was sorta hoping we would be done with the “evil or stupid?” judgment. Sigh…
Time for the Mormons to lose their tax-exempt status. It’s way past time for them and the rest of the low-information haters, regardless of the target, to STFU.
Did you guys see the memo from 1997 when they started planning this?
http://calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=7396
Is every faculty member at George Mason a wingnut??
Shorter Todd Swizzle Stick: Teh Ghey’s aren’t weeping on their couches like I expected and that’s bad.
It’s awfully strange that a group with such a fascination with young men’s choice of underwear should run such an outregeous campaign against gay marriage.
I think it’s time that religious groups are precluded from campaigning on moral issues on the grounds that it’s a total conflict of interest and they are all bug fuck crazy.
Okay, wow, so the gay black dude advocating no on 8 outside of my polling place was both a racist and a homophobe?
Okay, wow, so the gay black dude advocating no on 8 outside of my polling place was both a racist and a homophobe?
Hah! Next thing you will be telling me that there are asian lesbians.
My favorite sign at the SF protest last night:
I LOVE GAY MORMONS
Someone needs to make fun of PUMA’s. I popped over to Agent flobby’s PUMA hole and they are mad at us for being smug.
@Woodrowfan: No, but most of ’em are.
(At least, that was the case back when my wife was applying to Clinical Psych doctoral programs. They had at least one or two faculty with research in feminist and/or GLBT issues, which is why she was considering the program.)
[email address redacted by post author]
If a Mormon lived in Saudi Arabia, how many wives would he have? Actually it simply boils down to this. The Mormons are getting tired of editing their bible in order to fit in with society. Allowing teh ghey to marry would require another edit.
I suspect that Zywkicki’s grammar and usage are usually just fine, but that he loses control a bit as soon as he starts to contemplate the possibility of having a Mormon cowboy’s cock lodged firmly in his throat.
Next thing you will be telling me that there are asian lesbians.
If this comes as a shock, you really need to add Showtime to your cable line-up.
Allowing teh ghey to marry would require another edit.
Heh. As a mostly-lifelong Utahn of the non-Mormon variety, one of the few things I do appreciate about the church is that their dogma is amendable. The Prophet can just receive a revelation from teh Ghod and hey! Black people can hold the priesthood.
That said, it’s even more infuriating that they have a mechanism like that in place and still manage to be completely backwards in their attitudes about women and gay people and still terrible on race if not as bad as they were.
And the fact that they never admit that anything was ever different – in the whole “We have always been at war with Eastasia” mold – is annoying.
Put me on the Council of the Twelve and by heck, there’d be some changes!
Next thing you will be telling me that there are asian lesbians.
You’re supposed to ask for proof, with links.
Alright, guys, help me out here. Remember a few months ago we discovered that site for gays who weren’t really gay, or weren’t much into the buttsecks…or something? They had all the self-loathing of a closeted religious nutter, but weren’t religious. They had a term for themselves.
For the life of me I can’t find it…
Should be “the campaign for Proposition 8″. The amendment to remove an existing right.
Just imagine if Romney had become president!
http://www.yo-god.com/comics/mormon_marriage.jpg
And while the perfesser is correct, that 70% of the African Americans exit-polled were for Prop 8, he neglects to mention that the LA Times only asked 284 of them. I think we can all agree that this is not a statistically meaningful sample size.
In other words, blaming black people for prop 8 instead of the Mormons who bankrolled the damn thing is something only a wingut could do.
Um. That would be for Prop 8, yes? Which reminds me — has anyone bothered to research whether it passed, at least in part, because people were confused about voting negatively in order to affirm a basic civil right?
Oops. Took too long. Doctorb beat me. Harshly.
Shorter religious right: “”Look, over there, it was the negroes! Blame them, not us!”
*driving wedge with sledgehammer*
There is something peculiar about that rodent’s mouth. Further, it is just me or is there also something peculiar about the mouth of the chipmunk sitting on its shoulder?
http://www.heroichomosex.org
I’m a little embarrassed that I can remember the name of this website. But don’t get the wrong idea, for the record I do like teh buttsex and I would never get caught up in some sort of bizarre neoclassical fantasy to justify what I do or don’t like in bed.
OK.. O.T. but ok.
Oooh lookie here
You need no further proof of the limited sanity of the P.U.M.A. “movement” than them linking approvingly to some rant by the Crazy Pam about Obama’s Birth Certificate, then idly wondering about whether or not the story has merit.
I wish I had the link but a few weeks ago, there was a front page post at NoQuarter where I learned that Obama’s plan to have a tax credit to help pay for tuition (in exchange for 100 hours of community service by the student) was nothing more than an attempt to start up a new Hitler Youth.
p.s.
Not that there’s anything wrong with bizarre neoclassical fantasies, of course.
I am reassured to hear that.
One wonders how the CIA feels about Special Agent Flowbee being their best-known ex-employee.
shouldn’t that be “comprehension of the rules of subject-verb agreement are not a requirement”?
Oh, it will be SO easy to damage the Mormons and to teach them not to mess with political shit like this. They constantly seek legitimacy because of the laughable origins of their “religion”. So, simply drag that history back into the spotlight again. It’s WAY ugly and super ridiculous (topped only by Scientology) and we all outta say to ’em “If you’re gonna stick your nose in our business, we’ll cut that frikkin’ nose off”.
Here’s a good start for you:
http://www.realmormonhistory.com/
@Skippy: Grammar Police FAIL.
So, simply drag that history back into the spotlight again.
Two words: white salamander.
Look it up. You won’t be disappointed. 😉
Look it up. You won’t be disappointed. 😉
I used to have a T-shirt that showed a fake beer label whose logo was the top of the Salt Lake City temple with a grinning white lizard in the place of the angel Moroni. The slogan?
White Salamander Beer – the only Utah beer guaranteed to get you bombed!
Mormons weren’t exactly a randomly-picked target, not to mention that they are about as marginalized as, oh, I don’t know, the Marriott family.
I admit to once marginalizing Mormons by spray-painting a pentagram on one of their religious buildings. This is partly mitigated by my painting the word “CHEESE” underneath the pentagram.
Sadly, no. I’ve been hearing about a lot of disappointed gay/liberal people blaming blacks for Prop 8 passing, apparently conveniently forgetting about, oh I dunno, gay people of color… and about basic statistics, of course: 70% x (small number) = (still a small number!)
Another good source of Mormon info:
http://secweb.infidels.org/?kiosk=articles&id=367
I’ve been hearing about a lot of disappointed gay/liberal people blaming blacks for Prop 8 passing…
Yes, and to me they seem to be falling for a wingnut ploy to turn them against each other. Which sucks major ass.
Oh, it will be SO easy to damage the Mormons and to teach them not to mess with political shit like this.
So what price have other, more mainstream religions paid for venturing into the political arena in order to impose their sexual hang-ups on everyone?
the laughable origins of their “religion”.
Certainly an important criterion for deciding which religions are allowed to legislate morality, and which ones are not.
the laughable origins of their “religion”
I’m sorry, but all religious origins are just plain goofy. Wandering around in a desert for years? Sitting underneath a tree for over a month? Half-giant? WEIRD.
*SIGH*
Please allow me to point out that stupid fairy tales and religious fantasies have NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand.
The state issues the marriage license. The state adjudicates divorce. The state bestows rights and benefits upon married couples. No religion is required to EVER perform a marriage outside of it’s doctrine.
To involve religious doctrine is to buy a particularly manipulative lie. It’s no different than accepting the religious argument against abortion at face value. It’s utterly irrelevant, and to allow it to be part of the discourse is unfair and counterproductive.
This is a civil rights argument, NOT a moral argument, and the sooner we do a more effective job of framing it in those terms, the sooner it will be nothing more than embarrassing history, no different than Jim Crowe.
mikey
I’m sorry, but all religious origins are just plain goofy.
Perhaps, but I’d pitch old-school Buddhism as the least so. Plus Siddharta Gautama had the superb taste to die from accidentally eating poison mushrooms instead of being tortured to death, which I’ve always found appealing.
Oh, and there’s nothing at all goofy about the origins of Scientology. Perfectly rational, straightforward con game.
shouldn’t that be “comprehension of the rules of subject-verb agreement are not a requirement”?
(FYI: “Comprehension” is the subject; singular; requires “is” verb)
Carry on…
(FYI: “Comprehension” is the subject; singular; requires “is” verb)
…I have this feeling skippy was joking and has reeled in at least two victims – don’t tell me if I’m wrong.
Plus Siddharta Gautama had the superb taste to die from accidentally eating poison mushrooms instead of being tortured to death
Ahem. The translation of “s?kara-maddava” as ‘mushrooms or truffles’ is quite recent. Older sources say ‘dodgy pork curry’. I find that version more plausible, especially if three pints of Cobra strong lager were also involved.
Please allow me to point out that stupid fairy tales and religious fantasies have NOTHING to do with the discussion at hand.
Well. Except insofar that acceptance of same assists in the acceptance of the abrogation of civil rights. (In a field of goofy, ridiculous nonsense, Mormonism stands out as especially goofy and ridiculous, which is no easy feat.)
In the long-term, assuring fairness and equality for all is going to mean reducing the importance stupid fairy tales and religious fantasies play in our ways of thinking – and that means ALL of them, not just the numerically inferior and/or particularly obviously fake ones, and not excepting airy-fairy Jesus-as-pinnacle-of-liberal-virtue either.
If you’re simply saying that pointing all this out is risky as a short-term strategy, then fair enough. But I fail to see why recognizing a root problem for what it is is a bad idea, here of all places.
Good lord, it’s a cellar full of EPIC FAIL over there at Flowbee’s joint. I know I shouldn’t, but I couldn’t help making some very pointed rational comments. Like, Palin is a moron. Which apparently, makes me a “sexist son of Damien”.
Go check it out, if you get sick pleasure from watching crazy people descend even further into madness…like I do.
Perhaps, but I’d pitch old-school Buddhism as the least so.
Take a good hard look at Sri Lanka and the LTTE and get back to to me.
Guys, can we not prove the professor right? Whether or not some religion is “goofy” has nothing to do with it. Stoking other people’s bigotry to “punish” the Mormon church is not the way to go, and it would anyway affect their members, many of whom might well have a very different opinion from the hierarchy, more than the institution.
the origins of Scientology. Perfectly rational, straightforward con game.
To extrapolate from a sample of two (Scientology & LDS): The more recently a religion was founded, and the more documentation survives about its origins, the more likely it is that those origins will consist of EPIC flim-flam.
I can only conclude from this that ethical standards have been in a long, slow steady decline.
Well. Except insofar that acceptance of same assists in the acceptance of the abrogation of civil rights. (In a field of goofy, ridiculous nonsense, Mormonism stands out as especially goofy and ridiculous, which is no easy feat.)
But that IS the point. These are CIVIL rights. Religion has NOTHING to say about them, except to the extent we ALLOW religion to be brought into the conversation.
The key is to point out that individual belief systems are going to do what they are going to do, regardless of civil law, they bring no actual enforceable legal standing, only what they seem to feel they have the independent right to describe as “morality”.
No one is trying to require that evangelical christians perform same-sex marriages, any more than they are trying to force them to have abortions.
But the question is of legal rights and constitutional equality. And that is a discussion in which religion has NO standing..
mikey
1. What Mikey said.
2. Why does that poor rodent have an asshole on its face?
3. I still haven’t forgiven S,N! for that sqarsh patch photo. Maybe S,N ought to send me flowers.
but I couldn’t help making some very pointed rational comments.
I’ve tried to make comments there and it doesn’t work. He’s really not doing anyone any favors letting them live in their echo chamber about “Barky” (which I’m guessing doesn’t have anything to do with “Darky”).
Older sources say ‘dodgy pork curry’.
Well, religious studies were just my minor, so I’m not surprised I didn’t get to all of the Truth. I knew I was missing out!
Take a good hard look at Sri Lanka and the LTTE and get back to to me.
Violent nationalists make the Theravada origin story goofier?
The fact is, Michele Bachmann won, and your liberal milliondollar hissyfit over her truthtelling had no effect.
Heartland.
Stoking other people’s bigotry to “punish” the Mormon church is not the way to go, and it would anyway affect their members, many of whom might well have a very different opinion from the hierarchy, more than the institution.
Agreed. I know some Mormons who strongly disagree with the church’s position on Prop H8 – anecdotal, I know, but enough to prove that the church members are not unanimous about it. Plus I’m reading some rumblings around the ‘net of a boycott of Utah in general to punish the Mormons. Assuming Utah = Mormon = bigot is, not to put too fine a point on it, ignorant.
One of the odious things that the Mormons do is baptism for the dead. Basically, they have a “baptism” rite for dead Jews, Catholics, etc. converting them to Mormonism. The thought is that these poor dead people missed the opportunity to be Mormons and spend eternity in heaven. The post-mortem baptism gives them that chance.
What I would really like to see is some activists turn that around and hold gay marriage ceremonies for dead male Mormons. Who knows, maybe they wanted to live with another elder, but couldn’t because of the morality of their times.
I can only conclude from this that ethical standards have been in a long, slow steady decline.
Some call it progress. We call it maize.
a “baptism” rite for dead Jews, Catholics, etc. converting them to Mormonism
Is that like the “Martin Luther King was really a Republican” gambit?
Post-mortem craptism.
Who knows, maybe they wanted to live with another elder, but couldn’t because of the morality of their times.
It’s apparently much more common than the church will admit for missionary teams to become lovers out in the field. I’m not all that surprised – stuck far from home in a strange place and living together all that time, there must be some romance in that.
I say go for it with those posthumous gay weddings.
Xecklothxayyquou Hussein Gilchrist said,
November 9, 2008 at 4:50
(FYI: “Comprehension” is the subject; singular; requires “is” verb)
…I have this feeling skippy was joking and has reeled in at least two victims – don’t tell me if I’m wrong.
Oh, yeah, ’cause, in retrospect, as a joke, it are HILARIOUS!!!1!!
Slightly OT, but I would like to second the suggestion (in an Alicublog thread) of ‘Cadaver Synod’ as a band name.
It’s becoming harder and harder to deny that the homosexual marriage fanatics are anything but thugs and bullies.
Face it homos, America knows your lifestyle is evil.
Mikey is dead on. Marriage (and divorce) are about the apportionment of legal rights and obligations. As such they are explicitly secular institutions, which may or may not be accompanied by sanctification or blessings. This is true in every culture in the world (I am a professional cultural anthropologist). In most cultures, marriage is not a sacrament, though the couple and their union may be blessed. It was not even a sacrament in Christian Europe until later in the Middle Ages. Many cultures allow, or did so in the past, same sex marriage, including Europe until after 600 AD. It is a civil right, not a moral right and all of the religions can go bugger off. They have no standing at all in this issue. Nobody is going to make them to sanctify any marriage they do not want to.
My ancestors promised to become Mormons when the Mornomons rescused them while going west. As soon as they got to civilization they abandoned their promise.
Pwned!
Face it homos, America knows your lifestyle is evil.
If that’s real Gary, we control the government now. I’d take my crappy, styrofoam cross home and STFU.
Ed, the Tamil Tigers are a nationalist political movement, not a religious group. They’re doing exactly what others around the world do when they feel their country is being run by a bunch of furr’ners, which is blow things up.
Now tell me, considering the Mormons (shall we say) less than enlightened views toward another minority e.g. the black community for most of their history, that they may not want to open too many cans of worms looking into said history? It may be time to open all the cans.
Also, if a black man had started a church by claiming the things Joseph Smith did (Angel of Moroni, my ass), you think that man would have ended up being a major figure in spiritual life or another Father Divine?
I’m not blaming Buddhism in particular, I just despise the Western, liberal, fetishism of thinking they are immune to murderous, religious, idiocy.
Uh, the LDS church deserves to be publicly shamed and embarrassed. The leadership struck a deal with the evangelical leadership in order to get street cred and be fully welcomed into the wingnut world. And the rest of us paid a major price for it. Fuck them and their stupid beliefs.
I too have some good friends who are Californian Mormons and seriously considering leaving the church over this (and being somewhat encouraged to do so). I’m going to cheer them every step of the way. And I hope that everyone disagrees with the LDS church on this issue gets pushed out.
I take mikey’s point that the more religion gets brought into the issues, the further we are from make it an entirely civil issue. But when a religious group targets citizens for stripping away their constitutional rights, they should get it thrown back in their faces. We should be doing the same to every evangelical group in the state, too. If you don’t stick up for your rights and shame the assholes, you don’t have any rights.
Just Alison – Except that the Tamils are the foreigners, brought in by the British in the 19th century as coolie labor. They are rebelling against the national government dominated by the native Sri Lankans. The Tamils are Hindu and the Sri Lankans are Buddhist, but as you observe, religion plays only a minor role in this conflict (mostly as a symbol of ethnic identity).
I just despise the Western, liberal, fetishism of thinking they are immune to murderous, religious, idiocy.
I agree that is an overly romantic and, in the cases I’ve observed, patronizing / infantilizing view of Buddhism. I don’t have any illusions about Buddhists being anything other than humans, with all the failings any other humans have.
I just see their mythology as being less brutal, whether the practitioners themselves are or not.
The leadership struck a deal with the evangelical leadership in order to get street cred and be fully welcomed into the wingnut world.
Which amazes me. They’ll never be fully welcomed, and I think the church elders know it and are banking on the idea that they can be the top dogs instead of the Baptists, or whoever. Or else they’re just foolish in some other way.
I hope that everyone disagrees with the LDS church on this issue gets pushed out.
It could well be. Every now and then you get a spate of excommunications when people challenge the church in politically sensitive ways – I seem to remember that happening with people challenging them in the 1990s on their stand on women’s rights. If the church feels threatened by prop H8 push-back, they may try to Make Examples of some people, and I don’t think that would go over well.
I think that teh Dalai Lama his own self has observed that Westernized Buddhism is quite a remove from, for ex., Tibetan Buddhism, and further has advised that Western religious traditions be incorporated into Buddhist precepts rather than be discarded altogether. That right there makes it a winner of a religion, to me.
It’s common to romanticize religion into what we feel best about, whether it’s Christianity, Buddhism, or whatever. Thich Nhat Hahn and other Buddhist teachers advise taking what you need and leaving the rest, as did Shakyamuni Buddha.
I just see their mythology as being less brutal, whether the practitioners themselves are or not.
Yeah, but, push comes to shove, mythology or not you can get tweak out a gang of Buddhists to go slay people. In the above example it doesn’t seem to matter a bit what mythology you have at your back, getting your co-religionist to go do something really nasty doesn’t seem to matter.
Yeah, but, push comes to shove, mythology or not you can get tweak out a gang of Buddhists to go slay people.
Yes. We’re not arguing about that, are we?
I just see their mythology as being less brutal, whether the practitioners themselves are or not.
Unfortunately myth and reality do not often correspond. The devoutly Buddhist Japanese showed themselves to be mean mofos over several centuries. The Buddhist Thais also have a fairly bloody history. There are also numerous episodes on sectarian warfare and militant monks in both China and Japan. There is much to be admired in all religions, just do not romanticize any of them.
It was AND they are. And my left testicle still aches just before it rains.
DrDick – thanks, I didn’t know the Tamils were imports, although I knew the Hindu/Buddhist thing.
Ed, I think the point is that it’s quite hard to get a gang of Buddhists to go slay people – Buddhism seems to be the one religion that actually discourages that. It might be that it’s more of a philosophy than a religion, because just about every other religion on earth has spawned some nutcases.
But it’s also not fair to suggest that the LTTE are motivated solely, or even mainly, by religion. They’re not. As a group they’re basically secular, despite their position at the top of the Suicide Bombers’ League Table. Like many other such groups, what motivates them is political, not religious.
Unfortunately myth and reality do not often correspond.
Yes. We’re not arguing about that, are we?
I think the point is that it’s quite hard to get a gang of Buddhists to go slay people
Japan? WW II? Chinese Revolution? Shaolin monks?
Okay, I’ll retract that first para, since DrDick has apparently superior knowledge (I won’t say “knowledgeability” like that knobhead on Fox, because that really wound me up).
Just a question, oh omniscient DrD, for my edification: where do the Shinto fit in? I’m a little hazy on Japanese religious history, alas.
Hey, DD (can I call you DD?), if I could kick a man’s teeth out through the back of his neck, I’d do it too, religion or no.
No matter which goofy religion is flexing its muscles to make the government enforce its ridiculous mores, it’s unethical and those who attempt it need to be spanked. In this case, the Mormons overstepped the boundaries, and deserve to be punished for their transgression. Threatening to revoke their tax-exempt status is one of the easier ways to get them to retract their filaments.
Separation of Church and State: It’s for your own sake, too, you goofy god-botherers. Stop trying to control the government and we’ll get the government to stop taxing your well-stolen money.
Just Alison – Neither Buddhism nor Shinto are exclusionary religions. Most Japanese in the past have been both (most today are nominally still, but in reality neither). They tend to turn to each for different things. Can’t remember the the actual overall sorting, but Buddhism is definitely for funerals and the dead (among other things). The Chinese traditionally often combined two or three (or more) religions (Cnfucianism, Taoism, Buddhism, native animism, etc.).
Call me anything you like, just don’t call me a conservative or a Republican – them’s fighting words.
There may be people who are violent as a group, or individually, who call themselves Buddhists. This does not mean they are practicing Buddhism. Just as there are Christians who are violent as a group, or individually; this does not mean they are practicing Christianity.
Ok, I have to stop going to Flowbee’s. It’s like they’ve all been given brain transplants…and the brains came from Atlas Juggs’ commenters.
MzNicky – Exactly! People are people and routinely twist and warp their religions to suit their own twisted purposes. The teachings of Rabbi Yeshua al Nazarat bear no resemblance to those of Jerry Falwell, Hage, Pat Robertson, or any of the others who claim to be his followers and successors.
The thought of “a gang of Buddhists’ with their bukkhizzle and their bodhidizzle makes the shivers on my spine stand on end.
People are people and routinely twist and warp their religions to suit their own twisted purposes.
Or not. I dislike the idea that everyone fails their own religions and the religions are somehow pristine. Unless the religion feeds what actually makes you a human – good and bad – what is the point of it? The Gospel of John is all about hating the Jews: could there have been a holocaust without it?
The thought of “a gang of Buddhists’ with their bukkhizzle and their bodhidizzle makes the shivers on my spine stand on end.
As it should, what with their 3,927 ways to disassemble a human being with their bare hands and maybe a stick.
OK, so this is entirely OT, but in my own defense I am weary of contemplating theocracy. According to WaPo, it looks like President Obama has a list of about 200 Bushian executive orders he’s planning to reverse on or about January 20. Good start, Barry X. What’s next, and how can I help?
My point is not that everyone fucks up their religion, just that religions are human institutions and subject to distortion and manipulation. Rabbi Yeshua al Nazarat taught tolerance, pacifism, communitarianism, and disengagement from the world. None of those things can justify genocide. FWIW most of the bigotry in the New Testament comes from Paul, a hallucinatory freak who never even met Rabbi Yeshua. The crazy comes from the even later St. John the demented.
Other anti-prop 8 rallies included frequent use of racial slurs and racism. So apparently there’s a klan of homosexuals out there.
MOAR BLOOOOD!!!!
Rabbi Yeshua al Nazarat taught tolerance, pacifism, communitarianism, and disengagement from the world. None of those things can justify genocide.
Yeah, but even in my agreement with that general assessment people are going to – and have – latched on to “not peace but a sword” along with the Pauline nonsense in literal ways. I don’t think that’s distorting Christianity, it’s an inevitable manifestation of it. Complexity in religion does not yield simplicity in its manifestation.
FWIW. I am not a Christian (or anything else) and am not particularly fond of any of its current incarnations. My comments are not a defense of any religion, merely a commentary of the differences between sacred teachings of the founders and actual practices of the “believers”.
My comments are not a defense of any religion, merely a commentary of the differences between sacred teachings of the founders and actual practices of the “believers”.
Certainly. But Nice Guy Christianity is itself an interpretation.
Imam – I do not dispute your point about what people do now, but that is not a uniquely Christian problem. It is also worth noting that all religions embody similar complexities and are serially reinterpreted by the followers of the founder(s). The inevitability comes from it becoming a state religion (which is when it acquired the attributes you find disturbing). When religions become major political forces they become corrupted, no matter how elevated their original teachings. Happened to Buddhism as well in China, Japan, and Southeast Asia.
I think we agree.
Tossed Hopeful Marmoset with Besotted Baked Wines
Ingredients:
1 marmoset, influentially jellied
4 teaspoons wine
1 cheery Parmesan cheese, temperamentally stretched
6 ounces omnipresent okapi mandible
4 pounds mint
1 portion paprika
Pick over the ingredients dejectedly and discard excess alibaster. Separate marmoset liver from mandible. Inflate mandible. Combine the wine with the Parmesan cheese over medium heat in a wok. Stuff the resulting mixture into the marmoset. Find some White Riesling and drink it. Cream – very shaggily – the okapi mandible, mint, and the paprika. Stomp everything together grossly. Roast for 31 minutes. Serves 7 electronic friends with flat stomachs.
Also, I am legion.
I went to the protest against Prop 8 in San Francisco last night and I did not hear or see a single “racial epithet”. Remember, virtually all of the protesters supported Obama. It was the McCain supporters who refused to support a “Black Muslim terrorist sympathizing yadda yadda yadda”.
More on the SF protest here for anybody interested: http://stopbenlyons.blogspot.com/2008/11/no-to-h8.html
The Homo Klan vs. Buddhist Killer Gangs vs. St. John the Demented and the Four Horsemen of Doom vs. Dangerous Wrestling Midgets vs. Deranged Puma Brain Tranplantees in a two-fisted, red-blooded, all-night smackdown.
Scott, I was there too. I saw a human rainbow of marchers and honking supporters, but no hate. In fact, even though there was some anger, it was more a celebration of our solidarity than a rage fest.
Q: What did the fundie preacher say about Buddhism?
A: Any religion without a hell isn’t worth a damn.
Sorry. It was risque in 955 AD when it was first told.
Hells in Buddhism. Last count — 136.
The Christians are pikers.
http://www.khandro.net/doctrine_Hells.htm
If you’re in a Buddhist Hell, can you visit the other Buddhist Hells?
That would be COOL!
Is Kali there? She’s smokin’ hot!
I just want to make the brief observation that if it really were to be all teh neegrows’ fault, one might be a bit puzzled that Alameda County (home to Oakland) defeated prop 8 by nearly two to one, whereas Orange County went the other way by 15 points, and Tulare by 75/25. This is not even to mention that CA is on the lighter side of mid-pack, as States go, with about 6.5% of the population being African-American. Kind of tough to hang the whole kettle on that tiny hook.
The map…
The stats…
Ah, the politics of division. Everybody wants someone to blame.
There was an interesting diary on the subject at the GOS the other day that went over some relevant numbers.
That said, one might think that a group that spent much of its formative era being murdered, burnt out of their homes, and chased from multiple states might actually have some insight into and compassion for other groups being discriminated against. Do we find this sort of wisdom among the Mormon elders? Sadly, no. And so, in my hogfucking opinion, the lot of them should spend eternity finding out the capacity of their lower GI tracts for enveloping vigorously motivated rusty farm implements.
DrDick ,
1. Actually overwhelming majority of Sri Lankan Tamils were alredy in Sri Lanka ( immigrating from South India over the millenia ) by the time the British arrived The Tamils introduced by the Brotish are called plantation Tamils . They are scattered throughout Sri Lanka and have very little to do with LTTE .
2. Although Shintoism and Buddhism do co-exist in Japan , Japanese military ethics are drawn exclusively from Shintoism .
None of this of course alters the fact that people calling themselves devout Buddhists are as much capable of acting like complete jerks as anybody else .
In other news, Obama looks like he’s going to shape up to be pretty good after all. My worries that he’d be another DLCer could just be unfounded.
Obama Positions Himself to Quickly Reverse Bush Actions on Environmental, Social Issues
This is what Buddhist heaven and hell look like.
Tax the churches.
Tax the FUCK out of the churches!
Okay, maybe someone can help with this: I once read, I cannot remember where, a story of an American or British pilot, shot down over Japan in WWII, who crash landed near, and later died in, a remote village. The story mentioned that these villagers were more Buddhist than the mainly Shinto Imperial Army types, which is what reminded me of it. Anyway they wanted to give him a decent burial, and he had an Irish-sounding last name, and only one of them had any inkling of Irish culture, and it was from reading Ulysses.
So basically all these villagers wind up staggering blind drunk in honor of this dead guy (who had basically been trying to kill them in the first place).
Anyone know where this comes from?
As it should, what with their 3,927 ways to disassemble a human being with their bare hands and maybe a stick.
I was attacked by a Buddhist gang who disassembled me into 5 skandhas using their anatman doctrine.
It’s OK; I got better. The odd coincidence is that a few weeks earlier I had run into David Hume and he did exactly the same thing.
Now I am armed and prepared so it won’t happen again. I’m on the road and I’m gunning for the Buddha.
Is Kali there? She’s smokin’ hot!
She has that Thugee thizzle going on.
I am legion!!
After all, when you meet the Buddha on the road, you’ve gotta kill him…
I’ll stick with the easy version of heaven.
Beer volcanoes as far as the eye can see, and a stripper factorie.
er, factory
Off topic, but, as cool as I think the iPhone is, this should just be illegal.
A: Any religion without a hell isn’t worth a damn.
[coughs]. Knock knock.
Who’s there?
Ed.
Ed who?
Ed in arcadia ego.
The Articles of Faith are as follows:
12. We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
——————————-
LDS Church also led to a number of schisms involving relatively small groups who today describe themselves as Mormon fundamentalists and who still practice polygamy as well as other elements of 19th-century Mormonism that have been rejected or denounced by the LDS Church. These organizations believe that their doctrines and practices remain true to the original teachings of Joseph Smith, Jr. and Brigham Young.
——————————-
Little extra hypocrisy with that crazy?
I had a Moron teacher in high school I had questioned about Mormons, he said “That we are all Mormons we just don’t know it”
The really crazy part is this
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D05E1DA1739F93BA35755C0A9659C8B63
They were converting the dead. Talk about creepy cults………
If you see the Buttocks on the road, drill them!
Clif et al., does Anonymous at 2:19 require redaction?
[Clif adds: Yes. Done. Although Prof. Icky’s email is easily found on the George Mason site, people will need to find it there, not here.]
Q: What did the Zen Buddhist say at the Burger King?
A: “Make me one with everything.”
The fact is, like most liberal morons you hide under a cloak. Very reminiscent of the Klan. It’s quite clear that your greatest desire is to become a man. Although I’m quite sure you’ve become quite proficient at chomping. Here’s a kind warning. A great churning has begun. Molton lava is slowly, slowly working it’s way to the surface. Since you have no God, I’m afraid you must “abandon all hope”. Nothing can stop what will occur and the only ones to blame are those of your ilk. May God have mercy on your miserable soul.
The only reason more recently started religions look sleazier is that older religions have had much more time to whitewash their history.
For example, give me an example of a source of historical information about Jesus, which didn’t come from a Christian. Oh wait, there arn’t any. The gospels are nothing more than anonymous fanfic.
Older religions get to own their mythology. Newer religions have to deal with the modern eras fetish for recording and storing information. Court documents, newspapers, records from witnesses who are more likely to be literate, and more likely to be inclined to write.
As you might have guessed, I don’t like religion. But I do have a little grudging respect for Buddhism, since they tend to be less dogmatic, and with more intellectual honesty than the other major religions.
Religion is simply a tool of manipulation. Thus, it follows that the more stupid a religion is, the more stupid its adherents will be, and the less dissent will be tolerated. When the emperor has no clothes, little boys must be gagged in his presence. So something like mormonism, where the basic precepts of the religion look blatantly insane, even to people who already believe in the bits which are shared with mainstream christianity, is very very likely to be a closed cult, with very little intellectual diversity, which exercises strict control over its members, who act collectively at the bidding of their leaders.
This matches current observations.
The fact is, Moroms and Catholics are not real Christians. They do not follow the KJV Bible, like our founders did. America is a Christian Nation, Real Christians. If you are not a Real Chrisitan, you are not a Real American.
Buddhism: the antitheist’s black friend.
Gary, we have two chief weapons with which to deal with the likes of you: dimwitted badgers, rabid pelicans, and a fanatical devotion to the Pope…
When the truth is found to be lies
And all the joy within you dies
Don’t you want somebody to blame
Don’t you need somebody to blame
Wouldn’t you love somebody to blame
You better find somebody to blame
I think that in general, having a philosophy creates fewer problems than having a religion, which tend to harden and become dogmatic.
Once a religion has established unbreakable dogma, being ridiculous does not bother them. Thus, the way some Christians “war on science.”
Religion is supposed to explain the world. When it does not, that’s a bad sign.
Does he really believe that because the Mormons used to believe in polygamy, and because some still do, that gives them a right to tell other people who they can and can’t marry?
Well, there;s no more savage anti-smoking advocate than a former smoker…
About one minute into this trailer, Eduardo Ciannelli briefly discusses the finer points of Kali/Thuggee theology.
I’m surprised that neither McCain nor Palin used this speech to motivate their base.
Gary, when you’re qualified to judge what’s evil in this country I’ll start looking for reports of ice in hell, OK?
Another unsurprising FAIL from Gary Ruppert.
From the site of a Real Christian™
My favorite sign from the protests: “You want me to marry your daughter?”
I hereby declare today, and every Sunday, International Fuck a Mor
mon up the Butt Day.Is Kali there? She’s smokin’ hot!
And when she gives you a hand-job you stay jobbed.
Also, don’t discard excess alibaster; it’s so much rarer than alabaster you’ll want to keep any you find.
Also, don’t discard excess alibaster
Goddamned computer! [Shaolin Mantis Fist to the PCI slots]
I took a baseball bat to a dictionary in an attempt to weaken the definitions therein, but to no avail.
I think that in general, having a philosophy creates fewer problems than having a religion, which tend to harden and become dogmatic.
MOAR BRAAIIINS!!
Does he really believe that because the Mormons used to believe in polygamy, and because some still do, that gives them a right to tell other people who they can and can’t marry? No, it only gives them the right to tell other Mormons that they have to divorce one wife before they can marry a second.
Why is it okay for society to tell Mormons not to marry more than one person at a time, but not okay for society to tell men that they can only marry women, and vice versa? Is there some reason that homosexuals have a fundamental right to marry whomever they love, but polyamorists do not?
@PeeJ: How about fisting? Does fisting count?
> Why is it okay for society to tell Mormons not to marry more than one person at a time, but not okay for society to tell men that they can only marry women, and vice versa? Is there some reason that homosexuals have a fundamental right to marry whomever they love, but polyamorists do not?
Issues of power and child abuse.
I know, subtle issues. Simple, but nevertheless way over the head of republicans.
Skepsci, to answer your question in the simplest terms possible, it isn’t okay. It just happens to be the way things are. As long as the relationship remains between consenting adults, I feel that it should be permitted by law.
I don’t really understand the “Issues of power and child abuse” response. A group marriage is not automatically equivalent to marrying a 13-year-old girl by force. The first is a social contract entered into willingly. The second is rape with added magic words.
I’m with Captain Mike, except that I think the best explanations for why polygamy isn’t going to be legal any time soon are:
1) Americans aren’t going to go for it any time soon.
2) Actual implementation of > 2 person domestic partnerships would muck up the tax code something fierce, and without #1 changing, there’s no political will to figure it out.
Polygamy is simple arithmetic. Any natural population is roughly 50:50 male/female. Where polygamy is not the norm, or is balanced by the practice of polyandry, it has little social effect.
But in a society where all men have a religious duty to marry more than one woman.. That causes a bit of a supply and demand problem. There are 2 ways they fix this. Firstly, by re-defining “woman” to include female children, and secondly, by getting rid of some young men by kicking them out of the cult.. Or in days gone by, sending them off to war.
So what was my point? Oh yes. There isn’t anything wrong with polygamy per se, but mormons are scum.
I’m enjoying this thread – you guys are very witty. However, I must correct some misapprehensions concerning statistics.
A sample of 284 is plenty to get a good idea of the views of the total population. As an example, finding that 70% of the sample of 284 supported prop 8 would be sufficient to be very confident that at least 50% of the total population of the polled demographic group supported it. If the total population is 50% for and 50% against, then the chance of picking a random subgroup of 284 that shows 70% support or higher is less than 10 in 1 trillion [which I got – if you care – by approximating the binomial distribution by the normal distribution].
All we can assume is that the subgroup was blacks who came out of an unspecified set of polling places and answered the exit pollsters, and we are measuring their response to the pollsters, not how they voted. Perhaps the exit polls were in republican areas or highly religious districts. Perhaps they were embarrassed to admit to opposing prop 8. Perhaps it is a true reflection of the overall views of black Californians.
Sockpuppet, you forgot one technique that was used a lot in history: kidnapping. Although that’s usually as a result of sending the young bucks off to war, so I guess it kills two birds with one stone.
Martin: All of the above depends on picking a genuinely random sample, which is impossible. Pollsters have limited resources, limited methods of contact, and cannot force anyone to participate. So the sample is always selected in some way. California is a big, and diverse place too, making the job even harder.
Also, the exit polls exclude those who voted early. I know a LOT of the strongest Obama supporters got their vote in early. Does this remove the effects of the most liberal blacks from the results?
the rules of subject-verb agreement
What is with you LIBERALS and your insistence on agreement and CONFORMITY, anyway? You will not rest content until every sentence is a miniature echo-chamber of group-think.
How I wish you’d said “are” instead of being cowed by the dominant paradigm. Fight the power! Or not. Suit yourself.
“every sentence are” (?)
…I’m confused – but I will suit myself.
Sockpuppet#47: I completely agree that the sampling process can skew the results. I just wanted to point out, in contrast to the statements of Dagoril and Bagelsan, that the size of the sample is not small from a statistical point of view. Sampling biases certainly throw into question what demographic subgroup is actually being polled.
I’ve just looked at the poll, linked through my name (if I understand the URL function). There are perhaps 40 lines, not all statistically independent, of course, which certainly raises the possibility of a 2 standard deviation fluctuation somewhere, but not enough to drag the 70% figure down.
The “yes” vote for prop 8 for blacks in this exit poll is not statistically different from the the “yes” vote for prop 8 for Protestants; it is not very different statistically from the “yes” vote among married people or those who are parents of a minor child. It is lower than, but not statistically very different from, the vote by those of conservative political views. If we had more details of the overlap between the various groups we could analyze this further, obviously.
So according to this poll, married people, parents of minors, conservatives and blacks appeared to favor prop 8 at about the same level (all with the proviso “as sampled by this poll”).
While it may be useful from a tactical point of view to identify attributes that were positively correlated with voting “yes” on prop 8, in order to plan a campaign to reverse it, it is invidious to “profile” on that basis (I’m not suggesting you are doing that). Individuals are individuals. The only group that can blamed – if blame is appropriate – for the “yes” vote on prop 8 is that composed of the individuals who voted “yes” on prop 8, and, perhaps, those who would have opposed it but didn’t vote at all.
Darn tootin’. And when someone tells you to “question authority,” you ask them “says who?”
Woohoo!
..if they haven’t identified the null hypothesis (blacks support Prop 8) before they sampled, then their conclusion from the sample is a posteriori, and suspect (=invalid).
… to be precise – the null hypthesis would be ‘support for Prop 8 is not related to race”
I always understood “Question Authority” to be a title rather than an instruction.
You have contravened the regulations of the Question Authority. We will require that you submit all details of your questions to the QA for determination of adherence to the guidelines of question acceptability.
“….what!!??”
Says who?
Todd’s abstracts over on his social research web site are…dumb as hell.
Like this one from March 2008
Odd how he doesn’t get into the enormous profits to the banks of long term low interest mortgages and how such contracts double the cost to the home owner.
I don’t even have to read “Obesity and Advertising Policy” to know that he supports advertising that (he denies) contributes to obesity.
Oh, I didn’t mean the sample size (the minimum required sample size for statistical significance *does* depend on multiple –in this case, unknown– variables). I was addressing the total black votes for Prop 8; even a majority of “yes” votes from a small population results in a small net number of “yes” votes.
So, even if *all* African-Americans were ridiculously pro-Prop 8, it wouldn’t have the kind of numerical impact that, say, a lot of bigoted white people has.
Wandered over from somewhere or other and just wanted to thank Smut Clyde and ifthethunderdontgetya for the first real lol I’ve had in a long time.
Keep safe, and mind the rabid pelicans.
Prop 8 is a setback, true. But it’s just a toe-stub along the march of progress. Ten years ago, the idea that keeping gay marriage legal would fail by a margin of some four percent would have been unthinkable.
Slowly, insidiously, change is happening. It scares the #$^% out of the wingnuts, but their children are wiser.
I’m with Captain Mike, except that I think the best explanations for why polygamy isn’t going to be legal any time soon are:
Can I add one?
3) Mistresses are cheaper.
Also, don’t discard excess alibaster; it’s so much rarer than alabaster you’ll want to keep any you find.
Aw damn, and here I thought this was who you spoke to when you couldn’t figure out a good excuse for something…
Shorter Squirreldude: “I can has brainz, pls?”
[…] hadn’t heard of Professor Todd Zywicki until last weekend when I shared with you SadlyNauts his post at The Volokh Conspiracy about how teh mean fags were being ugly to […]
Good on eveybody who stood up against this sick lot ,the biggest spreader of the killer aids virus that has killed over 30 million and you want to make it legal ,what the hell is wrong with you ,dont you get it ?it is not normal or natural ,its discusting and a health risk .2 men ? yuk yuk .
melanie, would you please stay? I have some questions I’d like to ask you.