Well, I can honestly say that something other than our Commander in Chief is going to guarantee that the Democratic candidate, whoever it turns out to be, will have an easy time of the upcoming election. The conservatism of the Republican party is no big news, but the fact that two of the three front runners for nomination are in their third marriage is causing plenty of stir. Newt Gingrich has admitted to adultery while trying to impeach Clinton, Rudy Giuliani is on his third marriage (so is his wife), and the third guy is John McCain, who can't talk his way out of a speeding ticket, let alone into office.
I'd say we've got a civil rights picnic for the next presidential term.
Yet again, the combination of homosexuality and religion is making the news.
The head of the Southern Baptist Church has managed to offend both conservatives and liberals with his latest pronouncement. That's right folks, this guy thinks that homosexuality is genetic, and that we could "fix" unborn babies in the womb so they'd come out straight. On the one hand, liberals are offended by the admittedly consistent stance that homosexuality is wrong. On the other hand, conservatives are very unhappy at the thought of MESSING WITH AN UNBORN FETUS!
How often can you manage to offend the vast majority of the world's population with a single web post?
A question. Okay, given that I don't think I'm going to get more members in the near future, I suppose now is a good time to start getting into the meat of things.
What should religion be?
I'm not talking about any particular religion, or what it should be to a particular person, I'm talking about in the big, general sense. If you were starting a religion from scratch, day one, no cards on the table, what would your goal be? If you were able to find that perfect faith, one that agreed with you in every way that mattered, what would it be like?
Dunno if this is allowed This isn't nessecarily a deep thought required kind of topic and I'm not sure there are enough people here who know enough about the two to really get into it but I thought the dude lecturing brought up some good points and well, it's not nessecarily such a serious topic, a reprieve from more heavy thoughts.
So, what does this mean for me and you? Well, as far as I know, there's no Anglicans reading. (If you are, stop lurking and join!) So there's no direct impact. However, this is the first time in my memory that a religious sect has shown a clear divide on this subject. The decision reached will likely set precedent for other groups.
If, for example, the Anglican Church doe split on the issue of homosexuality, that will mean that there is a Christian church that openly accepts homosexuality. Is this an important step toward an equality that disregards sexual orientation and preference? Absolutely. As much as the government claims it, and as much as I'd liek to believe it, the seperation of church and state is a pleasant fiction. Federal acceptance of homosexuality as no different from heterosexuality would have to start with at least one church declaring openly that it's 'okay to be gay'. If the schism occurs, and nothing horrible happens to the american branch of anglicanism, that will give a green light to other groups who feel strongly on the subject to split, or convert, or whatever.
If the American Anglican group decides to retract the ordainments of their gay ministers and retract their support of civil unions, it will send an equally clear sign. A sign that the principles of equality and tolerance take a back seat to unity and fear.
I certainly hope that the latter does not happen.
I think I'm going to go find an Anglican Minister and shake his hand.
A Baptist Church... ...in Kansas has been frequently showing up at the funerals of servicemembers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, and protesting loudly at the funeral services and outside of the churches where they are held. They maintain that servicemembers continue to die because the United States condones homosexuality.