And another thing that makes me rigorously angry about the California Supreme Court's decision and much of the work of the Bush administration: this is classic religious persecution--not where the religious are persecuted, but where those who do not share narrowly defined religious beliefs are forced to live within their context regardless.
Religious ideology typically is rather narrow and highly defined. If people, on their own accord choose to adopt and live by a set of narrowly defined religious ideas, they should be allowed to do so, as long as their doing so is not hurting others. (This horrid, current example of a parent refusing chemotherapy for her young teenager (13) who would otherwise have a 95% cure rate if treated now, because of her religious objections, is a classic example of when a person's religious beliefs must be curtailed by the state. Her narrowly defined "values" are literally going to kill her child. This is immoral and intolerable.)
To otherwise deny a person the practice of their religion is persecution. But, to allow people to force others to live by their narrowly defined religious beliefs when they do not share them, in fact, may fully find them loathsome, is the very religious persecution this nation was founded to escape and prevent.
And one final thought on this matter, at least for now <smile>, that some 18,000 gay couples can remain legally married while the court makes legal marriage impossible for any other gay people utterly makes no sense at all. This just flies in the face of horse sense. Because of a well-funded religiously-based effort, the state of California has stripped away the civil rights of an entire group of people that are defenseless to protect themselves. Let's not redefine words. This is discrimination. This is religious persecution. This is wrong.
Leave a comment