It's Mishie Time!

Mishies need love, too.

It's summer, that magical time of year filled with cookouts and pool parties and sugared up kids driving their parents insane- and Mormon Missionaries* (hereinafter "mishies").

Look, I know mishie visits can be a bit obnoxious. Here you are, innocently enjoying your day, debating whether or not you can put off mowing the lawn another day (in my case, no), and two earnest young men in distinctive clothing** ring your doorbell, eager to tell you why you're going to Hell.

It's just not a conversation you want to have right now, I get it. What you really want to do is slam the door in their faces or curse at them. Maybe you're more like me and you really want to mess with them, answer the door naked covered in ketchup and invite them to join the ceremony.

Don't do it.

Mishies are just doing what they were raised to do. It is the single most important thing they can do in the Mormon Church, and if they don't do it they will be ostracized by their community, friends and family. Many mishies spend 2 years simultaneously questioning their faith and spreading it.

Mishies are frequently treated poorly by the mission, and here, and here, including not being given enough to eat.

Mishies are treated poorly by the people they attempt to convert, all day, every day for 2 years.

Don't add to the burden. If you came across man lying in the street, visibly having suffered a beating, would you kick him? If not, don't do the same to the mishies. (If so, drown yourself.)

What should you do? If you have the time, and you're not alone in your home, invite them inside to enjoy a nice cold, nonalcoholic, uncaffeinated beverage***. Tell them you were just about to eat lunch/dinner, would they like to join in? Press some leftovers on them. Tell them you would just throw them away, or that your Italian heritage would be forever insulted if they didn't take your food.

If you don't have the time, give them a bottle of water to take with them, maybe some prepackaged snacks (I keep both around in the summer for just this purpose, you can get peanut butter crackers cheap at Walmart), and politely explain that you are busy, but thank you for stopping by.

You don't have to convert to their religion or adopt the mishies, but a kind word and a bottle of water is quick, easy and possibly worth more than you know to a lonely kid facing 2 years of rejection and verbal abuse.

It's summer, be nice to the mishies.




*After many years typing legal documents, I am no longer certain what gets capitalized and what doesn't. As far as I can tell, when typing filings for Court, just go with German capitalization rules: every noun starts with a capital letter.

**You can tell mishies from other proselytizers two ways: 1) mishies are almost always two men, 18 - 20 years old, and 2) they wear black pants, white button down shirts and ties.

***Mormonism's version of kosher forbids both caffeine and alcohol. So Coke or Pepsi would be out, but Sprite's okay.

God Told You What?

It's really too bad you can't see me going through my google reader. I'm sure it's quite entertaining, as I mutter and curse, throw my hands up in the air, smack a fist into a palm, slap the desk, and, occasionally, tilt my head to that quizzical angle dogs use when they're politely trying to indicate they don't actually speak any language, just give them the bacon.

This "explanation" of being a Mormon left me wordlessly tilting my head to the right, as if 25˚ to the right would make the following words understandable to me.

I have a new baby now. A girl. She came out of me layered in softness. I breastfed her religiously until one day I had a revelation that I was supposed to move her to the bottle. Not a bottle with breast milk, my breast milk, but a bottle of formula. I fought with this revelation for weeks. I prayed, I debated, I went to the temple. I ignored the whole idea until one day I was at Costco deciding which container of powdered formula to buy. That was the day I decided that God loves formula. I watched as the expectations I had known about me as a mother shatter and fall to the floor on the baby aisle at Costco.

What? In what way does that make sense? Why would god, presumably the same guy that gave you breasts that make milk just for your baby, tell you to buy formula at Costco?* Does god have stock in Costco?

I thought at first that she was having trouble breastfeeding (it can become very painful), or was just tired of breastfeeding (a little person on your body all the time, it happens) and looked to god to support her decision, but, if she is a reliable narrator, she did not want to formula feed, she wanted to breastfeed. God told her no. In Costco.

Even if I were willing to believe that god direct dialed your brain in the formula aisle at Costco**, why doesn't god give parenting advice to people who actually need it? Why doesn't god tell people who beat their children to stop? Why doesn't god tell people who starve their children to buy some damn food? God wants your baby to have formula instead of breastmilk, and it was so important you couldn't disobey, but god doesn't care at all about children being beaten, starved, raped and killed?

What makes you so fucking important?

*This is not an indictment of people who feed their babies formula. I support, fully, whatever decision you make regarding the feeding of your child.

**I'm not.

One Poisons the Other

The atheist position on religion and politics is that religion poisons politics, bringing to the political realm goals and ideas that have no business in the politics of a secular democracy such as the United States.

I think, given this, that perhaps the Christian position on religion and politics should be the opposite side of the same coin: politics poisons religion, bringing to religion goals and ideas that have no business in the realm of Christianity.

Case in point:

I have no idea how this will play out, and as the non-Mormon on this blog to some extent it is none of my business, but last week one of the Mormon elders “apologized” to some pro-gays in Oakland

. . .

It is made clear by every one I have read on this that it is NOT and apology for Prop 8 or for Mormon doctrine on homosexuality, but rather an apology for the pain felt.

Okay, it's a start. I'm inclined to snark, am desperately holding back some truly nasty comments, but perhaps this is sincere. Perhaps, beginning from a point of recognizing, and apologizing for, the pain caused by Prop 8 and Mormon doctrine, more can come. I doubt it, but beneath my cynicism is an idealism that gives me hope. And frequently gets viciously beaten down by reality, but that's another story.

Beyond that, if you've ever read the Bible, which Mormons at least nominally follow, this apology is within the teachings of Christ. Politics, however, demand a different path:

I do not know if I would make such a generalization about Monson, but I will say this was a huge political gaffe for the CJCLDS. There is an old phrase, “Never apologize, it makes you look weak.” It’s not the most Christian of phrases as confession lies at the heart of who we are, but it sure applies to politics. If mistakes were made, you find a way to correct them, but politically you have to do so from a position of strength.

A less Christ-like approach I could not imagine. Apparently, neither can the author, but politics, once adopted as a goal, soon becomes the goal. It's isn't about making America moral and safe for hetero-only marriage, it's about winning. And, as a wise man once said, winning isn't everything, it's the only thing, and that leaves very little room for the teachings of a savior.

All of which leaves me with one conclusion: anyone who combines religion with politics cares very little indeed for religion.

Utah's Dirty Little Secret

Utah, land of the Mormons, who value virginity only slightly less than your average fundamentalist muslim, has a dirty little secret:

[Missy Bird of the Utah Planned Parenthood Action Council] said of the 123
Planned Parenthood Action Council affiliates around the country, the Utah
affiliate has the highest number of young women seeking emergency anti-pregnancy
treatments, known as the "morning after" pill.

That's odd. I wonder what else is going on in the most conservative, religious place in America (other than Amish enclaves)? A place that, btw, teaches abstinence exclusively.

Pregnancy rates among girls younger than 15 doubled between 2002 to 2007 in
that [Utah County], while the rate remained stable in the rest of the state,
according to the Utah Department of Health.

Statewide, chlamydia rates rose 150 percent and gonorrhea rates rose
122 percent between 1997 and 2007, according to the Utah Department of Health.

The majority of new cases of chlamydia (57 percent) were found in those
ages 15-24 and 30 percent of those were under the age of 19.

What do leaders in Utah have to say about this?

The head-in-the-sand approach that actually is harming the very children
they are trying to protect can be seen in a statement Utah Eagle Forum President
Gayle Ruzicka gave to The Tribune in its story about the poll.

"When you teach them about sex, that just encourages sexual activity," she said.

That would be hilarious if it weren't for all the unwanted pregnancies and disease.

Fostering Patriarchy Spiritual Growth

mormon, lds, patriarchy, feminism, pink,

(h/t to Whore of All the Earth from Pharyngula's comments for the link that led to the link.)

The Mormon Church is, if you are not aware, awash in activities designed to strengthen one's mormonism, or to keep members so busy they don't have time to think about it. (Good strategy, that.) Their latest is a redesign of their Patriarchy Parade, otherwise known as the Personal Progress program for girls. It's very . . . pink*.

"We hope that Personal Progress will help [Mormon girls] understand who they are, their identity as daughters of our Heavenly Father, how precious they are in His sight and the great roles and responsibilities they have as His daughters here on the earth at this time," added Sister Dalton, general Young Women president.

. . .

In addition, the Young Women medallion has been redesigned and now includes age group historical symbols for Beehives, Mia Maids and Laurels, and has a ruby. "I want every young woman to realize that she is more precious than rubies," said Sister Dalton.

The booklets are pink. "We are excited about the color of pink, because we think these young women are pink. They resonate to the softness and the femininity of that color. We want them to understand that they are soft, they are unique, they are feminine and that they don't have to be like the boys."

Okay, credit where credit is due. Certain types of rubies are the most valuable gemstones in the world, which I did not know until I looked it up. However, the whole discussion of pink is sending me into feminist convulsions. Women are not soft. Hello, we give birth. We. Give. Birth. Women grow another life inside themselves, supporting it with their own bodies, and then expell something the size of a watermelon through a hole the size of a lemon. That's not soft. That's insane. We are unique, but so is every man. Not every woman is feminine in the sense they're using it.

And then we get to "don't have to be like boys." First of all, there's nothing wrong with being a boy. Of course, I happen to like boys. Also, being a feminist is not being like a man. Being strong, motivated, smart, educated, etc. is not masculine. Men do not own these traits, these are traits everyone can and should share in. I'll just blow a Mormon's mind right now and state that I am all those things and I'm wearing pink as I write this. Ha!

Sister Dalton said that few people are teaching values in society today. "Who is teaching values in our society today? Where will a young woman go to understand the values of faith, divine nature, individual worth, integrity, knowledge, choice and accountability? We believe this is probably one of the very few places that they are being taught values. And it is very important for strengthening homes and families and our entire society."

Sigh. That's right. We godless people just let our children murder and rape and pillage (Ar!). Haven't you heard about the random hordes of atheist pirate children overtaking the country? As for teaching girls the values of individual worth, integrity, knowledge, choice and accountability, I suggest a good feminist blog. I have a couple in my blogroll. Those values are the cornerstones of feminism. Wait, is that irony? Does anyone have Alannis Morrisette's phone number?

In the category of Don't Try This Analogy at Home, I give you:

"I think that sometimes, because this is small and simple, that we underestimate the power of small and simple things in a girl's life," said Sister Dalton. "It is like putting on an armor for a young woman, one chain at a time, one experience at a time. … We want to integrate this into a young woman's life."

Ummm . . . what? That doesn't even make sense. I'm fairly certain you cannot don chainmail one link at a time, though my actual experience with chainmail is limited. Which makes me wonder about Madame Dalton.

seems uncomfortable to me

"These young women are strong and they are noble," said Sister Dalton. "But it is as if they are standing in a riptide and trying to stay upright in the world. And this will be a tool for parents and priesthood leaders and all of us to really encircle a young women about with support and with faith and testimony and help her in her desire to be righteous and pure and worthy."

. . . and help her in the Church's desire to uphold the patriarchy. Fixed.

*I have no quarrels with the color pink itself. It's not pink's fault what the patriarchy does with it. I wear it fairly often because it looks good on me. Of course, ghosts look at me and think, "Damn, she is pale!", so color is a necessary thing for me.

I Get Offers

atheism, mormon, lds, atheist, evangelism, witnessing,
Yours, Sincerely, whose name cracks me up because I sign about two dozen letters a day "Sincerely yours", has thrown down the gauntlet. Well, more like gently laid a velvet-covered gauntlet disguised as a rose on the table.

Hey PF, thanks for visiting my blog recently.

That's probably not sincere, because well, you can read for yourself. (I wasn't outright rude or anything, but I can't believe she truly enjoyed that.)

I sincerely hope you are feeling better and on the mend.

I will grant the sincerity there. Just because we totally don't agree on anything doesn't mean she wishes me physical harm or suffering. So, thanks for your good wishes, I'm doing quite well.

Please don't take this as sarcasm on my part when I say that I find your challenges (perhaps that's not the right word, but can't think of anything better) with the issue of God, quite interesting.

As every good pitchman knows, start your pitch by buttering up your target. I'm "challeng[ing]" and "interesting", and by implication, quite smart. Tell me more!

You are very good at pointing out the inconsistencies between Holy Writ, and human behavior (you know--when avowed Christians behave in a manner inconsistent with their professions of faith, or when their interpretation of Holy Writ is inconsistent with logic).

She's Mormon, which involves believing that the Native Americans are descendents of the ancient Isrealites, that horses were in the Americas prior to the coming of Europeans, and that a con man heard the voice of god. Or an angel. Or something. So, like every other belief system, entirely devoid of logic. The Mormon response to logic is simple: ignore it. So, yes, let's discuss logic, shall we?

I also notice you spend a fair amount of time grappling with the issues of the Justice of God, versus His mercy, and how to reconcile the two. I'm curious, do you really want answers to your questions, or have you irrevocably made up your mind? Regards~

This last is the gauntlet and framing the argument all at once. If I find her beliefs illogical and ridiculous, I'm being close minded. And who wants to be close minded? The only way to prove myself as smart as she implied I am is to agree that the entire human genome is lying.

Give it your best shot, I suppose.

There'll Be Polygamy in the Streets

gay, marriage, traditional, polygamy, mormon, lds, fundamentalist,

About every other post from a "traditional marriage" blogger invokes the scare tactic of polygamy, and it didn't strike me why until last night, while I was doing the dishes. My reaction to this scare tactic has always been "and? how many people even want to do that, anyway?"

Then it hit me. A lot of the most "traditional marriage" bloggers are mormon, and like all religions, the LDS has skeletons in its closets and embarassing family members that show up at the most inconvenient of times. LDS's biggest skeleton is the polygamy practiced by the religion's founders, and still practiced today by fundamentalist splinter groups*.

I think the mormons fear that as soon as same sex marriage becomes legal nationwide, their spiritual cousins will come crawling out of the woodwork to demand that polygamy be made legal, which would be quite an embarrassing scene, indeed. It's like holding a family reunion, planning for a year to make everything perfect, and then Uncle Norman shows up, punches Grandpa Fred, pukes in the potato salad and passes out. Although in this particular analogy, Uncle Norman shows up with his 6 wives, the youngest his 14-year-old niece/cousin/half-sister.

I suggest that the next time a "traditional marriage" blogger invokes polygamy as a natural consequence of same sex marriage, you should ask them why they think that, and then end with "oh, yeah, mormons were into that at the beginning. I get it."

*LDS does not currently support polygamy, and has not for quite some time. By no means am I suggesting that mainstream mormons engage in polygamy, nor are they responsible for the abuses of fundamentalist splinter groups.

Were You Planning on Slapping People?

hate crimes, homophobia, homosexual, gay, mormon, christian, legislation, beetlebabee, fred, phelps,
One of the oddest arguments against the new hate crime bill goes like this:

If a gay man slaps me, it’s a misdemeanor, maybe a fine. Under this law as proposed, if I slap him back, it’s a felony hate crime.

Understanding the law fail.

First of all, no, defending yourself from a physical attack is not a crime. One is allowed to engage in activities normally defined as crimes (i.e., slapping, punching, kicking, shooting) in the furtherance of self defense. In other words, if someone physically attacks me, I am allowed to physically attack them in order to make them stop. This has nothing to do with hate crimes.

Secondly, the author of this little rant is a Mormon, which means she is already protected under existing hate crime legislation. That's right, kids, hate crime legislation is nothing new. Currently, hate crime legislation protects people based on religion, race and country of origin. What we're debating now is adding sexual orientation and sex to the protections. So, people like our Mormon friend are essentially arguing that they want to have protection under the law that they don't want to share with homosexuals. (I don't see Beetlebabee arguing for dismantling existing hate crime legislation.)

Thirdly, was she planning on slapping people? Slapping people is against the law. If you slap people, you may be arrested. To whinge that you may get more punishment than you bargained for is a little . . . odd. "Not that I would shoot people, but if I do shoot people, I don't want to spend more than 15 years in jail. Adding an extra 9 years to my sentence would be completely unjust." Umm . . . what?

Fourthly, this is a complete misunderstanding of the point of hate crimes legislation. Beetlebabee is a Mormon. She is currently protected under hate crimes legislation. If the hypothetical gay man slapped* her because he finds her personally objectionable (who doesn't?), she's right, no hate crime. If, on the other hand, our hypothetical gay man slapped her for the purposes of terrorizing all Mormons, then yes, that is a hate crime. As the law stands, however, if Beetlebabee slaps the hypothetical gay man in order to terrorize all gay men, there is no hate crime. She would not receive the same punishment as he would in the same circumstance.

Lastly- Fred Phelps.

*yes, i know, slapping is not a hate crime whatever the reason, but i'd prefer not to discuss even hypothetical murders.

Sedition Is the New Black- Orson Scott Card Edition

orson scott card, mormon, gay, marriage, homophobia, homosexual, traditional, stupid, asshat,
Orson Scott Card (who used to write some pretty decent scifi/fantasy novels) is the latest wingnut to call for armed resistance against a lawfully elected government. Being mormon, he gives his sedition a different spin than most:

Why should married people feel the slightest loyalty to a government or society that are conspiring to encourage reproductive and/or marital dysfunction in their children?

what exactly is "reproductive dysfunction"? is that like erectile dysfunction? or fallopian tube blockage? how exactly would a government encourage that?

Why should married people tolerate the interference of such a government or society in their family life?

what interference? is the US government telling you how to run your marriage? no, they're not. bob and bill's marriage has absolutely nothing to do with yours, Mr. Card. i will repeat that, very loudly and slowly: A B S O L U T E L Y N O T H I N G.

If America becomes a place where our children are taken from us by law and forced to attend schools where they are taught that cohabitation is as good as marriage, that motherhood doesn't require a husband or father, and that homosexuality is as valid a choice as heterosexuality for their future lives, then why in the world should married people continue to accept the authority of such a government?

Look, it's a red herring! Exactly when have children been taken from people because those people taught abstinence and homophobia? They haven't. That's when. Nothing like inciting a little hysteria on your way to treason.

What these dictator-judges do not seem to understand is that their authority extends only as far as people choose to obey them. How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.

Biological imperatives trump laws. American government cannot fight against marriage and hope to endure. If the Constitution is defined in such a way as to destroy the privileged position of marriage, it is that insane Constitution, not marriage, that will die.

Um, yeah. "Biological imperatives trump laws"? Really? So I can go ahead and pee in the middle of Fifth Avenue if that's where the need strikes me? Can airline pilots just go ahead and sleep through flights if that's where they happen to get tired? Did Mr. Card stop to think about that statement at all?

By the way, Mr. Card, the US government is not "fighting against marriage". You still have a right to conduct your marriage in any way you please. So do I. And now, in some places, so do gays. My marriage does not affect your marriage. So leave me out of it and shut the fuck up.

Oh, and armed revolt against a lawfully elected government? We call that treason. It's also a good way to get people killed.

You'd Think a Prophet Would Have Seen This Coming

mormon, lds, homophobia, homosexual, evangelical, catholic, prop 8, marriage, tradition, gay
Mormons have been whining that everybody associates prop 8 with them, when in fact evangelicals and Catholics were instrumental in its passing, too.

I just had to post this because it’s too interesting to pass up. So Miss California makes a statement about believing marriage is between a man and a woman, I blog about it, and suddenly traffic to my blog jumps by the hundreds. And guess what people are searching for? You got it, variations of “Miss California + Mormon” and “Is Carrie Prejean Mormon?”

Why is it that we’re still stuck here, folks? Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints are not the only ones who donated to Proposition 8. And Mormons are not the only ones who worked to ensure the passage of Proposition 8. In fact, Mormons were the last faith-based group invited to join the Protect Marriage coalition! Granted, I take pride in defending marriage, but that doesn’t mean I was the only one doing it and maybe, just maybe, there are some other folks out there who would like their fair share of intimidation, intolerance, vandalism, and vulgarity. Just a thought . . . .

So I'll do the Mormons a favor and explain something obvious to them.

Everyone in the US already knew what Catholics and evangelicals are like. They've been in the public eye, being all intolerant and ridiculous for quite some time. Mormons, on the other hand, were an unknown quantity to most of the US until very recently, when Mitt Romney ran in the Republican primary and the Prop 8 debate reared its ugly head.

This may seem a little odd to Mormons, but if you had asked the average USian about the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, you would have had to rephrase that to "Mormons" to even get a response. Then, their response would have been something vague about "those guys in the white shirts and black ties" and "Utah". Very few people who weren't Mormon, or didn't live in a predominantly Mormon community, would have been able to tell you about the prophets currently leading LDS, or that the Book of Mormon is, to Mormons, as important, if not more important, than the Bible.

That's the unfortunate part about the leaders of LDS deciding to flex their newly discovered muscles in the Prop 8 debate: it cemented in many people's minds a connection between Mormons and anti gay propaganda. Now, if LDS' leaders had decided to jump into the public scene by, I dunno, helping Katrina victims or something, the general public perception of Mormons would be entirely different. "Oh, yeah, Mormons- didn't they build a bunch of houses for people in New Orleans? Yeah, they seem nice."

Really, you did it to yourselves, and it would not take a prophet to see the backlash before it even started.

So, there you have it, an object lesson to any up and coming religions looking to burst onto the scene: start with something nice.

On Unemployment

tanner, unemployment, mormon, lds, stupid, asshat,
I'm sick of hearing about the have and have not's
Have some personal accountability
The biggest problem with the way that we've been doing things is
The more we let you have the less that I'll be keeping for me
--Nine Inch Nails, "Capital G"

You can always tell an article on unemployment/poverty written by somebody who has never faced choosing between food and medicine, or heat and the mortgage. Clearly, James Tanner has never sat on the floor and cried because he needed to keep the phone on in order to get calls for job interviews, but that meant not paying the electric bill. Again.

People like this probably shouldn't write articles about how lazy and ungrateful the unemployed are. (At the very least, don't do it where I can see you.)

Most of the article concerns the history of the Mormon church through the lens of his ancestor's experience, and then we get this (as if life in the late 1800s were somehow relevant to the financial crisis of today):

It is remarkable to me to hear today's stories of the unemployed. They act like it is someone's fault that they do not have a "job." First of all, sarcastiquotes why? Is Mr. Tanner not sure what a "job" is? All right, I'll help you out: a post of employment; full-time or part-time position. In the current economic crisis, I think we can all agree exactly whose fault it wasn't.

What do all of these people do all day? That would be your business why? They're not lazy, Mr. Tanner, they're unemployed. I love how, in less than a nanosecond, a "blue collar hero" can become a "welfare queen" in the eyes of a conservative.

They certainly don't go volunteer at the public library, they don't show up to serve at the relief agencies mormon alert!, they don't volunteer in their communities, they aren't planting gardens, cleaning their houses or helping in care centers. How does Mr. Tanner know any of this? Particularly, how would he know that unemployed people aren't cleaning their houses? Has he checked? Why would he even assume this? It's just bizarre.

Oh, wait, got it. Welfare queens are poor and poor people are dirty! Dirty, and usually brown.

We certainly haven't seen a resurgence of community service in places like Michigan and Arizona where there is high unemployment. For one thing, "resurgence" implies that at some point community service was high, then it was low. I'm confused as to how he knows this, as official stats would be hard to get this soon after the layoffs, etc., but he may be talking about Mormon specific community service, in which case he may know that.

Maybe we need to rethink the concept of unemployment. Which concept? Redefining "unemployed" would be a little weird, as it simply means "not gainfully employed". I think he means "unemployment compensation". Here we are, in the middle of the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression, and Mr. Tanner wants to take away unemployment compensation. That sounds like a great idea! Let's drag the entire world into an economic death spiral because, in Mr. Tanner's view, the unemployed are lazy welfare queens.

I'm beginning to think Mitt Romney might have been more dangerous than I originally thought.

Can We Say Disingenuous

religion, religious, morality, mormon, lds, homophobia, homosexual, marriage, tradition, traditional, gay, dna, rockwood, angela,

I would like to be upfront with you: when I offer you an argument, it's an argument I believe in. I truly believe it, I truly feel that way, and, when you read my words, you're getting an honest look at the way I think and feel. You're not getting unlimited access to my every thought, but the thoughts I share represent exactly what I really think.



I mention this, because in lurking around the bigotsphere, I came across this gem from our friend, Beetlebabee, aka Angela Rockwood, Director of/for/in the DNA. She not only admits to being disingenuous* at best in her arguments against same sex marriage, she encourages others to follow her down the yellow brick road of hiding one's true intentions.



Comment by beetlebabee on March 8, 2009 at 6:09pm


In order to be effective in the marriage debate arena i.e., making sure homosexuals remain second class citizens, I think it's important to focus on love more than we focus on the sin. is this some new definition of "love" I am unfamiliar with? this, from the woman who has said, repeatedly, that marriage is not about love? pick a side, angie! While rejecting the behavior, Christ never rejected the soul. love the sinner, hate the sin. as if gay were a sin. way to frame the argument, ange. It doesn't do us any good to focus on "those sinners" with our fingers pointed out. it might do you some good to focus on "those sinners" with your fingers pointed inward, however. We've got to do a better job of articulating our position beyond just "That's nasty" or "that's evil". that's right, angie's not above reducing homosexuals to second class citizens because gay sex makes her feel squicky, and apparently she can't stop thinking about it.



There are a whole array of points that are infinitely more persuasive than opining on someone else's level of righteousness. glad you've noticed that, but it is highly disingenuous to go out there and propound on the other arguments, when you're real problem is that the bible, or the book of mormon, told you so. You know what I mean? be as insincere as possible? We're all sinners at some point, but those gays just won't quit! so let's move beyond that and talk about the other arguments that are out there. not the arguments that really represent our viewpoint, the other ones.



When I debate, I never use the word "sodomite" for instance because it's unbelievably rude?, because it pidgeonholes or possibly pigeonholes me immediately as someone who believes in religion as the basis for my argument. no, it outs you as a nasty bigot. who the fuck says "sodomite" anymore, other than Westboro Baptist? and if you're not familiar with Westboro, just type "god hates fags" into a search engine and see what comes up. While that is very true that you're a nasty bigot?, religion is my basis and my rock good for you, leave the rest of us out of it., it's not the only proof out there supporting traditional marriage, religion isn't proof. it's faith. two different things. and the reality is, that hearts and minds close to the truth very quickly if you take religion as your main defense. because the rest of us can tell the difference between truth and religion. of course, we're not mormons.



For me, Religion is my basic foundation. i'm glad for you, now stop trying to legislate it all over the rest of us. Because I believe in the scriptures and, again i'm glad for you, now stop trying to legislate it all over the rest of us. , and the word of God, I know that homosexuality is not the path to happiness. not for you. not for me, either. wtf does that have to do with anything? Because I know that, I know that studies and other proofs will automatically follow. oh, dear. the bible/book of mormon said so, therefore, there MUST be proof out there somewhere. we just need to find it. this is called "confirmation bias" ange. it's not how science works, it's not how logical argumentation works, but thanks for sharing. So, I focus on a broader base, truth. so, religion isn't truth? i'm getting a little confused here. Because everyone is searching for truth. except people who already know it, like you.



People will be much more open to our line of thinking if we come at it from the arena of truth, rather than overt religion well, yeah, but that's still disingenuous.....even though at heart they are the same. at your heart, not at mine.



just my two cents. i added at least another $1.50. i'm generous like that.



*disingenuous, for those unfamiliar with the word and lazy about the clicking, means lacking in frankness, candor, or sincerity; falsely or hypocritically ingenuous; insincere

Talking Social Politics With Aliens

marriage, prop 8, mormon, morality, love, homophobia, homosexual, lds, gay, tradition, traditional,
I figured out the problem with trying to convince a Mormon Prop 8 supporter that we should not deny the love of two people, gay or straight.

To mormons, marriage and love are unrelated concepts.

Mormon women are encouraged to marry not the man they love, but the man who will get them the closest to the Celestial Kingdom (mormon heaven).

From exmormon.org:

In the car on the way back to school, she told me her story. They had dated for 3 years, then she was ready to get married but he wasn’t ready yet. So she dated other people and found a guy to marry. She had thought about waiting for this young man until he was ready to get married, but didn’t know if he would actually decide to marry her when he was ready to marry. Then came the comment that just about did me in. She said that looking at both of these guys, she chose the guy she eventually married because he would be able to get her closer to the celestial kingdom than the young man she dated for 3 years and loved! She didn’t have the same feelings for her husband as she did for her old boyfriend, but by golly she was sure to get closer to the celestial kingdom! Her heart was still hurting.

To a people for whom love is just another word, trying to discuss Prop 8 in terms of love is like trying to discuss art with an alien. Your perspectives are simply too divergent.

Just as a refresher: the divorce rate for mormons is 24%. The divorce rate for atheists is 21%. This is especially remarkable when you consider that while atheists would be the least likely to be ashamed of being divorced, mormons should be the most ashamed of divorce. So why are more mormons divorced?

Perhaps because love and marriage should be very closely related concepts?

Mormon Traditional Marriage Supporter Changes Her Mind

prop 8, gay, marriage, homosexual, homophobia, tradition, traditional, lds, mormon,
Sometimes, people amaze me. Truly amaze me.

Debi Hartman, a former leader of the Mormon opposition to same-sex marriage, has changed her mind.

Wow.

Keep in mind, the LDS has no patience for those who go against the grain. She is doubtless being shunned as you read. For her to have the courage to not only change her mind, but go public with it, is really, well, amazing.

You can read the article in its entirety through the link above, and you should, but I wanted to highlight exactly what it is that changed Ms. Hartman's mind.

Asked if she believes any single religion has the right to impose its beliefs unto the constitution of a secular government, Hartmann said, "I thought that having civil unions and having marriage was the perfect answer to that question, as long as all rights are provided. I absolutely believed that up until last year when I read the California Supreme Court's ruling."

The court ruling was the turning point for Hartmann on marriage equality.

"It crushed my beliefs," explained Hartmann. "It taught me that words can be invidious. For example, if you and I had to walk into a doctor's office and they ask us to fill out a form and you have to check 'civil union' and I check 'marriage,' that's the invidious discrimination. The same rights have to be called by the same name. That's the answer to removing the religion from our laws."

She also no longer believes that same sex marriage will affect churches in any negative way. She came to this belief through a careful review of reality. Hartmann said she no longer believes the rhetoric that marriage equality will affect religious freedom. "I think Massachusetts has taught us that it doesn't," she said. "I may be naive on this, but I don't think that we've seen churches close in Massachusetts."

When asked to review the reciprocal beneficiaries law she had helped write, Ms. Hartman realized the truth of the matter. What happened was I was shocked," Hartmann said. "Now a lot had happened to me in those 10 years [since Hartmann led the LDS fight against same-sex marriage]. I had become educated and enlightened. And when I began to review the reciprocal beneficiaries law, I wasn't approaching it from an emotional standpoint or trying to defend something. I was simply approaching it. I wasn't looking to find something, I was just looking. What Hawaii's Future Today was looking for in the inclusion of benefits in the reciprocal beneficiaries law wasn't there. When I went back and looked for the outline of the bill ... what happened was in conference committee it had been gutted, rights had been stripped out of it. And then I compared it to the marriage law. That law automatically enjoins children, and spouse. Reciprocal benefits did not. That's when I realized I had hurt families."

. . .

"I did not grasp that I was supporting a bill that was not protecting and enjoining all rights and protections that all families with children should have a right to have. I was supporting a law that literally oppressed and repressed and I didn't get that," said Hartmann.

Modern Day Mormon Gulags

mormon, lds, god, good, torture, homophobia, gay, utah, buttars, boys, ranch
As we watch the Mormon Church celebrate people like Senator Buttars (he of the "gays are more dangerous than ricin and bin Laden combined" fame) and desperately to keep gays as second class citizens, I though it appropriate to remind you that as clean-cut and sincere as they seem, there is an ugly underbelly to the Church of Latter Day Saints. (btw, please check out exmormon.org if you are considering converting, or if you have any questions about the LDS. the stories on that site are heartbreaking, but the courage the posters have displayed in taking control of their own lives is truly inspiring.)

From Daily Kos

This story is about Eric Norwood's personal experiences at a place called The Utah Boys Ranch, which models itself as a "tough-love" prep-school, but while Eric was there, he witnessed some unbelievable atrocities. It is a Mormon-funded and staffed facility, and religious indoctrination is a fundamental aspect of the school. There was sexual, physical, and emotional abuse, suicide, staff corruption, and escape. A major Utah political figure, Senator Chris Buttars, was the executive director while Eric was there

His filthy digit tasted like rust and fish. "I can hurt you without leaving any marks," Brent growled as I writhed in agony on the ground. I struggled for breath as he mounted my back, put his finger in my mouth, and pulled back on my cheek, fish-hooking me. The pain was incredible. I tried to beg him to stop, but the words would not come.
After he finished beating and bludgeoning submissiveness into me, he pulled me up by the rope that was lassoed around my waist. The wool army blanket I had fashioned as a skirt had shifted askew and I stood there in my boxers bleeding from my nose, humiliated.

My green Utah Boys Ranch t-shirt had been ridiculously stretched out and looked more like a low cut blouse. I loosened the noose around my waist and pulled the itchy blanket through the loop and folded it over so it looked like a brown bath towel secured by a belt. He wasn't satisfied, he wanted more. I just wanted out of this classroom. I started to think about how I got here.

The Utah Boys Ranch appears to be a kind of tough-love school with a Christian-esque undertow. My parents thought as much when they employed its services in hopes of corralling their spiritually wayward son.

[...] this is background into how Eric wound up at the Utah Boys Ranch. It seems like pretty typical 15 year old stuff to me.

The first person I met in Utah was Senator Chris Buttars. I had no idea who he was until that point.

All I knew was that he was to be feared, and I was scared to death of him from the moment I first saw him.

"Sit down," he squawked in a loud, high pitched, galling voice that sounded like a cross between a buzzard and an old cowboy. He continued to make it very clear that I was at his mercy. He told me who he was - politically - and the influence he had. If I ever wanted to leave I was to do what he said. "How old are you?"

"Fifteen," I mumbled.

"Three years might not be enough for you. I can have a judge order you to be here until you are 21," he croaked. With that he sent me off to be "changed and put on work crew."
I was led down a long hall of doors with nameplates. I had no clue what kind of place this was. I didn't see any cows or horses...no sign of what I thought a "ranch" would resemble. Paul took me into a small room that was no bigger than a broom closet, which was stacked to the ceiling with three colors of cloth, blue, green and brown. There were green t-shirts, blue t-shirts, and blue jeans.

There were also brown army wool blankets, and I remember thinking that I didn't want to sleep under such a coarse covering before I was told to "put it on." I was told to wrap a thick, itchy blanket around my waist like a towel and wear it like a dress.

I was then given a "leash" made of climbing rope and what I think was a square knot to tie around my waist.

I had never imagined being tethered and walked like a dog, but here I was, being walked like a dog towards a cluster of about 12 other boys. They were lined up facing a wall while two large men in red sweatshirts watched them from a couple of chairs off to the side.
Some of the boys had camouflage pants on, a few others wore dresses. I wondered how long I was to be in this blanket dress. I was later told that it was so I wouldn't run away - and they were right - I literally could not run in this humiliating getup. I could barely get a full stride walking.

That's when I saw Brent - or 'Captain America,' as he was called disparagingly - for the first time. My leash was handed off to him, but he told me to wrap it around my waist and go join the group of young men who were standing with their noses touching the wall, all spread out about arms length from each other.

I turned to the boy who was standing to my right and asked him how long he had been here, but before I could get my question all the way out, my forehead careened into the carpeted wall in front of me. A sharp pain stabbed the back of my head, and suddenly bad breath filled my nostrils. "Are you talking on my work crew, boy?" a red-shirted man screamed at me.
My head was ringing. I was still trying to piece together what had just happened when I looked behind me and massaged the pain in my head. Suddenly my legs fell out from underneath me and I was on my back.

He had just slammed my forehead into the wall, and now he had put his foot behind mine and pushed me, sending me to the floor flat on my back.

He stood over me and bawled, "Don't look at me. Don't look around. Don't you MOVE without permission! You don't do anything without permission! If you talk, I think you are talking about running away, and I will restrain you. Do you understand?" I nodded. I knew then that I had to get out of this place. I wasn't going to last here.

It was only my second week on work crew when Neil Westwood refused to turn his back to Brent and place his nose on the wall, which is what the command "face the wall" plainly meant. It was a Mexican standoff for a few moments. Stunningly it seemed like Brent was going to let Neil get his way. I had never seen an older boy in a pissing contest with a staff member before. The younger kids refused commands, but they were always quickly thumped into docility.

Neil was a big kid, a lot bigger than me - probably 230 pounds or so, and over six-feet tall, but dispelled any image of toughness with his glasses, disproportionately small arms, and frizzy hairdo. Neil was as obnoxious as he was an easy target, but I still can't believe that no one reacted when Brent stood up in a flash of rage and chucked a full, unopened gallon of milk at Neil's face from about five feet away, crumbling him to a pitiful puddle of tears, blood, and non-fat milk.

The work crew was depraved. When they didn't have us facing the wall for hours at a time we were digging ditches with spoons, only to fill them back in again.

We made huge piles of heavy rocks taken from the field, the field that both surrounded and contained us, only to be told to move the massive mound to another location. They worked us in ways redolent of Stalin's gulags.

There was an agonizing week of all-day sod laying - with bits of mud and grass sticking to the inside of my wool dress - in preparation for some ceremony the work crew boys weren't privy to. The Scarecrow Festival was even worse. We worked for weeks from eight in the morning till eight at night in preparation and to take down that contrived fall carnival/ fundraiser. Boys wished for death. There was also a dry-cleaning service that they operated somewhere in town, which was supposedly much better than any job on campus - even kitchen duty.
Getting off from work crew meant school during the day, and considerably less work. Some sadist there created a t-shirt caste system that involved wearing either a blue t-shirt or green t-shirt. "Blue shirts" could talk, receive letters (which were opened and read first), talk to their parents, and possibly go off campus.

"Green shirts" were allowed into school, but that was about it. No speaking, sitting, or anything but working or reading LDS literature. A "green shirt" was forced to read the Book of Mormon, in particular the first 22 chapters. We were interviewed by one of the four full-time Mormon missionaries that worked there and had to paraphrase all of "First Nephi" before receiving a blue t-shirt. What good derives from reading the Book of Mormon under duress is anyone's guess, but I did it. I had to.

I had to go to church and seminary too.
It turns out that any form of decadence - smoking a little grass, telling your math teacher to sit on it, being gay or bi-curious, sexually assaulting a family member or young girl - is curable by a little hard work, tough love, and Mormon doctrine. Boys with "sexual issues" are housed together in what could only be some cruel showing of satire.

They were constantly being caught jerking each other off onto each other, or, more tragically, assaulting younger boys. Whatever it was, they would be shoved into blankets and thrown on work crew. On Tuesday night they would meet with all the boys with sexual issues and provide remedies like IcyHot on the penis to stifle homosexual urges.

I was kept there until they couldn't keep me any longer, and on my 18th birthday I walked out the front doors into a cold October morning with nowhere to go and nothing but my freedom. If I didn't experience it myself I would not believe a place like this exists. A Mormon gulag.

How do they get away with all of the abuse? The forced religion, the stifling of freedom of speech? Was it legal to prevent us from reporting abuse to authorities, or to restrain us with ropes, wool blankets, and duct tape? Is it legal to force young boys to talk about
masturbation with Mormon clergy and missionaries? How does all of this go unnoticed? We were young and naive and didn't know that most of what they did to us was illegal. Buttars was famous for telling us that we had only three rights: food, safety, and shelter. They failed to even live up to those standards.

Besides being callow, we hardly had the chance to report any abuse. They instruct parents to ignore any claims of abuse from their children. They call any complaints from children a manipulation tool - "fear factor" - and instruct parents to be wary of the "tactic" they say they encounter most.

There were also no phones to call the police. No nurses or medical examiners to talk to. No government authorities to check in on us. Incongruously, this Orwellian facility desperately needs government oversight.

Sen. Buttars said it all when he told a reporter, "What sets us apart is that we're the only residential treatment facility that doesn't seek or accept government funding. If we did, they'd control us."

Reprinted with permission from Orato.com

Surprise, Surprise, the Mormons Lied, Part II

lie, liar, prop 8, traditional, marriage, homophobia, homosexual, gay, mormon, money, democracy, legislation, politics,

For more on Mormongate, check out Latter Day Chino's riveting expose. (Mostly I just wanted to say "riveting expose", but really, it's very informative.)

Surprise, Surprise, the Mormons Lied

morality, mormon, lie, lying, prop 8, tradition, traditional, marriage, gay, homosexual, homophobia, fppc, california

From americablog.

In a Friday filing with California's Fair Political Practices Commission, the Mormon Church listed almost $190,000 in previously unreported expenses in support of last year's successful campaign to eliminate marriage equality in California.

$190,000. That's how much they now admit to spending.

The report, filed with the secretary of state's office, listed a variety of California travel expenses for high-ranking members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and included $20,575 for use of facilities and equipment at the church's Salt Lake City headquarters and a $96,849 charge for "compensated staff time" for church employees who worked on matters pertaining to Prop. 8.

It seems as if the complaint filed with the FPPC by Californians Against Hate was not as specious as the Mormons initially charged:

Up until Friday, the Mormon church had denied any direct financial support for the campaign beyond a reported $2,078 spent for bringing church Elder L. Whitney Clayton to California.

$2,078. Hmmm . . . That seems smaller somehow than $190,000. Let's see . . . yes, it is, $187,922 smaller in fact. Quite a lie, that one.

Church officials complained that Karger's complaint was full of errors and that the church had "fully complied" with California law.In other words, the Mormon Church had no intention of modifying their expense reporting until pressed by Californians Against Hate and the subsequent -- and ongoing -- FPPC investigation.

The Mormon Church deserves the scrutiny its been getting. The leaders have not been honest. Teddy poses the important question: what else is the Mormon Church hiding? We have to find out.

So, tell me Ruby, tell me Pearlysnot, tell me DNA, how are you going to spin this one? What are you going to say to excuse the lies?

How 6 turns into 13.1 million

(hint: it's not lack of condoms.)

Anthony Gottlieb, in Faith = Fertility, manages the most offensive interpretation of simple demographic data EVAH!

From INTELLIGENT LIFE magazine, Winter 2008

If a Martian were to look at a map of the Earth’s religions, what he might find most surprising is the fact that such a map can be drawn at all. why? does religion work differently on Mars. Is it in any way surprising that people with similar beliefs and values tend to live close to one another, if possible? Do Martians prefer the opposite? How strange--he might say to himself--that so many of the world’s Hindus are to be found in one place, namely India. uh, where hinduism was born? why would that be surprising? And how odd that Muslims are so very numerous in the Middle East. again, where muhammed was born and spread his new faith? how peculiar. With the disconcerting curiosity that is so typical of Martians yeah, it's not cute, give it up, he might wonder what explains this geographical clustering. see above. Do people move countries in order to be close to others of the same faith? Or do people simply tend to adopt the religion they grew up with? The answer, of course, is the latter--on the whole. again, this is so obvious not even the hypothetical martion should be surprised by it. There are exceptions: Jews moving to Israel, for example, and there are many other cases of religious migration.

Still, the huddling of the masses yearning to be free? faithful is mainly explained by the fact that religion runs in families. If you have a religion, it is probably the same one as your parents. Earlier this year a survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life found that nearly three-quarters of American adults professed the religion in which they were raised. not surprising. But instead of finding this glass to be three-quarters full, newspapers preferred to notice that it was one-quarter empty. It was the minority of Americans who either switched religions, or abandoned religion altogether, who were highlighted in reports of the survey well duh. they're the oddballs, and oddballs are interesting. when was the last time you saw an article about people doing totally normal, boring tasks that everyone does? okay, the onion, but not satire?(“Poll Finds a Fluid Religious Life in US”, ran a headline in the New York Times).

Plainly it does not count as news that religion remains largely a family affair. Yet it should do be? "do" doesn't make sense here, because of its largely unnoticed consequences. dum dum dum! Some religious groups are dramatically outbreeding others, in ways that have an impact on America, Europe and elsewhere. the brown people are coming! the brown people are coming! Consider the Mormons, who grew from six people in a log-cabin in upstate New York in 1830 to 13.1m adherents around the world in 2007.

okay, i hate mormons. their religious book is such an obvious forgery it's ridiculous, they hate gays, and they endlessly proselytize. It's obnoxious. But, the above sentence, in context, makes it sound like 6 family members having endless incestuous sex eventually created 13.1 million people. Physically impossible, and rude to imply.

At the beginning of the 20th century, Mormons were a fringe sect in America, with decidedly unusual beliefs. as compared to what? i find their beliefs no more odd than anyone else's. yeesh. (They officially hold that God once had a body; that people exist as spirits before they are physically conceived; and that Jesus will one day commute between somewhere in Israel and somewhere in the United States. why is that last one strange? has this guy consulted his own beliefs lately?) Today Mormons are about to overtake Jews in America da dum, da dum, da dum; in fact, they may already have done so. And they almost had their own presidential candidate, in the person of Mitt Romney, a former governor of Massachusetts. no they didn't have their own presidential candidate. he would have been all republicans' candidate. that's how that works, asshat. The rapid rise of Mormons in America, growing by an average of 40% every decade in the 20th century, is mainly due to their large families. The American state with the highest birth rate is Utah, which is around 70% Mormon. In America, on average, Mormon women have nearly three times more children than Jewish women. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, however, do have plenty of offspring. because they're not allowed to use birth control. what do you think will happen when you combine sex with no birth control? in a healthy woman, a baby every year or so. This fact is changing the face of Israel, where such families have three times more children than other Israelis. As a result, at least a quarter of Israel’s population of under-17s is expected to be ultra-Orthodox by 2025, according to Eric Kaufmann at Harvard.

A similar but more gradual increase in the religious right has been taking place in America for decades, and not just because of Mormons. Conservative Protestant denominations as a whole grew much faster than liberal ones in 20th-century America, and it has been estimated that three-quarters of this growth is due simply to higher birth rates. again, sex+no birth control= lotsofbabies Were it not for the fact that Evangelical Christians reproduce faster than other Protestants, George Bush--who attracted most of the Evangelical votes--probably could not have made it back to the White House in 2004. and now i'm pro forced sterilization.

Like other demographers, Eric Kaufmann expects western Europe to become markedly more religious in the course of the 21st century, as a result of the relatively low fertility of unbelievers and immigration from more pious places pious, huh? not religious or observant? pious? does he really count mulsims as pious?. Not only do denominations with traditionalist values tend to have higher birth rates than their more liberal co-religionists, but countries that are relatively secularised usually reproduce more slowly than countries that are more religious. According to the World Bank, the nations with the largest proportions of unbelievers had an average annual population growth rate of just 0.7% in the period 1975-97, while the populations of the most religious countries grew three times as fast.If they want to spread their gospel, then, one might half-seriously conclude that atheists and agnostics ought to focus on having more children, to help overcome their demographic disadvantage. i dont have a gospel, asshat! i have the lack of a gospel! and i don't want to spread it, i want you to leave me the fuck alone!

Unfortunately for secularists, this may not work even as a joke. securalism is not a religion. and why "unfortunately"? are you finally admitting that you intend to kill us all, or at least remove our right to vote? Nobody knows exactly why religion and fertility tend to go together. Conventional wisdom says that female education hey, i can say no!, urbanisation, falling infant mortality it was not uncommon for a woman 80 years ago to have 15 children, only 10 of which made it to adulthood., and the switch from agriculture to industry and services all tend to cause declines in both religiosity and birth rates. In other words, secularisation and smaller families are caused by the same things. makes sense. Also, many religions enjoin believers to marry early make bad decisions while you're too young to know any better! and no divorce!, abjure abortion and sometimes even contraception "sometimes even"? how about "frequently"? how about "as long as men don't have to carry a baby for 9 months and then spend 36 hours giving birth, we don't need no stinkin' birth control"?, all of which leads to larger families. sex+no birth control= lotsofbabies.

But there may be a quite different factor at work as well. Having a large family might itself sometimes make people more religious, or make them less likely to lose their religion. chicken, egg? egg, chicken? Perhaps religion and fertility are linked in several ways at the same time. sociology is like that. Mary Eberstadt, a research fellow at the Hoover Institution in Stanford, California, has suggested several ways in which the experience of forming a family might stimulate religious feelings among parents, at least some of the time. She notes that pregnancy and birth, the business of caring for children, and the horror of contemplating their death why, under normal circumstances, are people contemplating their child's death?, can stimulate an intensity of purpose that might make parents more open to religious sentiments yeah, and lack of sleep will make you delusional. Many common family events, she reasons, might encourage a broadly spiritual turn of mind, from selfless care for a sick relation to sacrifices for the sake of a child’s adulthood that one might never see. because atheists are incapable of sacrifice and selflessness. we're teh evul.

Eberstadt argues that part of the reason why western European Christians have become more secular is that they have been forming fewer stable families, and having fewer children when they do. or the other way around, it's hard to say. also, in western europe, and the US, life is simply too expensive for people to afford 10-15 kids, especially with only one spouse working and the other staying home to raise them. this may be affordable in india or the middle east, but it's not here. This, she suggests, may help to explain some puzzles about the timing of secularisation in certain places. In Ireland, for example, she notes that people started having smaller families before they stopped going to church. And, she argues, if something about having families can incline one to religion, this might shed some light on another mystery: why the sexes are not equally religious.

According to Rodney Stark, an American sociologist of religion, the generalisation that men are less religious than women “holds around the world and across the centuries”. In every country--both Christian and non-Christian--analysed by Dr Stark, based on data from the World Values Survey in the 1990s, more women than men said they would describe themselves as religious. There is no agreed explanation for this striking difference. Perhaps the fact that women play a rather larger role than men in the production and rearing of children has something to do with it. If family life does contribute to religiosity, then having larger families might backfire on unbelievers. It might make them more religious. And since faith is still largely a family affair, their children would then be more likely to be religious, too. so, either way we're screwed. have lots of babies to beat the fundagelacists at their own game and end up a fundagelacist. fuck it. i'll stick with none, thank you very much.

Read This- It's Important

Americablog has one of the most well thought posts on the whole Prop 8, you're intolerant of my intolerance bullshit I've ever seen.

Please read it.

While you're at it, read the comments. The pain and anger from the gay posters is palpable, and it hurts. It should. We have failed them. We continue to fail them.

They deserve better. We all do.