so much for "loving thy neighbor"

[piranha]

i learned something new today. washington DC has as part of its legal code a provision that prohibits any referendum that would have the effect of authorizing discrimination against DC residents on the basis of their sexual orientation or gender.

that is awesome.

and fortunate. because the forces of bigotry, hiding behind another "marriage initiative", are busy trying to work against same-sex mariage in DC, since there is clear movement towards recognizing it in the district.

the arguments are... i know i said i'll try to no longer use words like "stupid" as an insult, but what else is it if a christian quotes pontius pilate: "let the people decide". good grief! does this person not know what those people voted on? "stupid" doesn't even cover it.

read this report from a hearing in DC; the unintentional irony can be shoveled with gigantic trowels. what can you say to such people? they don't even know their own religion, their own history, the meaning of words they use:

Another woman patiently explained to me that the 60-odd people who testified against equal rights for gay people [...] did not hate gay people. They just feared gay people, she said. They were not homophobic.

Comments

[necturus]

Unfortunately, D.C. is not a state, and any ordinances it adopts, whether by referendum or otherwise, may be modified or abrogated by a simple majority of Congress, which is its lord and master.

I'm surprised it hasn't occurred to the Democrats to promote D.C. statehood, though, because the place votes overwhelmingly Democratic and it would almost certainly give them two more senators.

DC statehood

[eagle]

The Democrats have been promoting D.C. statehood for years, getting nowhere for precisely that reason.

The latest attempt at resolving this was the DC voting rights bill, which would come short of making it a state, thereby dodging the Senate problem, and instead give it one seat in the House, offsetting that politically by adding a seat for Utah. It didn't get anywhere, like all the previous (very numerous) attempts at resolving the situation.

Googling for DC statehood will turn up a bunch of timelines and various organizations pushing for it.

[matthewdaly]

I can wrap my mind around why the federal government would want sovereignty over the bureaucratic and touristy focal points of America. You wouldn't want Governor Marion Barry or whoever to have even the theoretic ability to shut off the electricity in Congress or the White House.

Rather than statehood, what I'd prefer would be to hold our nose and pay massive one-time bribes to Maryland and Virginia to take back the portions of DC that are now the residential areas. Then the residents of Washington, Maryland would have the right to choose the people who are doling out the money to solve their crime and schooling problems.

[matthewdaly]

It is a challenge for me to not be dismissive of the morality of the black church in the United States, because I strongly feel that in broad terms they have a long way to go in recognizing the spiritual and political dignity of women and LGBT folk. At the same time, I need to keep in mind that this is an institution that has been under constant attack by white America since the colonial era, and they are fully justified in not seeing my criticism in the good faith that is my conscious intention.

So even though I die a little when I see Christians wishing to claim the mantle of Pilate, the white privilege alarm part goes off when I start imagining that I need to herd all of these ordained ministers into Sunday School to be taught the proper truth as it has been revealed to me. I fully believe that I am right (because if I didn't, I'd believe something else), but being right isn't the only part or even the biggest part of getting someone else to agree with you, doubly so if they have a mistrust of you.

"What can you say to such people?" I might say "Please sit down and share tales of your journey with me, and if you like I'll share tales of my journey with you, and may it be God's will that we are both enriched by the experience."

[piranha]

that's a good point. this is a case where it's obvious to me that my "colour-blindness" is pure ignorance; i have no experience whatsoever of black churches in the US (or anywhere else, in fact), other than the most superficial, stereotypical impressions (great music, joyful worshipping).

what i'd say to people out in the community, over my back fence is very different from what i'd say to them when we're in an official hearing where they want to deny civil rights to others. and that's possibly where the failing lies -- if that's our first encounter i am doing something wrong.

[treesahquiche]

It is indeed awesome that DC has that provision against those kinds of referendums in its legal code, since it appears as if it needs it. I wish other states had the same.

I am always disappointed when people who profess to belong to a certain religion have little understanding of their own sacred text(s) and instead of trying to study the text itself and its historical and social contexts, insist on picking and choosing quotes to defend their preconceived notions and misinterpretations.

[piranha]

it irks me especially as a former christian who lost faith in the existence of the christian god, but not the belief that jesus has some darn good ideas about interacting with other humans. when active christians don't seem to listen to jesus at all, and instead argue from selective old testament passages, i deep down don't understand it, and it feels completely unchristian to me. how can one, as a christian, NOT listen to jesus? isn't that the whole point?

and yes, i wish all states had such provisions. it's becoming very clear to me that the tyranny of the majority is a serious problem for democracy.