In the worst possible weather — cold rain and sleet — About 100 people joined me in Trenton yesterday to brave the elements and protest in favor of gay marriage in NJ. We stood there and shivered, hovering under each other’s umbrellas while we heard stories from gay and lesbian couples, singles, and their supporters in an attempt to show our dedication to the cause of marriage equality.
The press didn’t show, and neither did most of the 400+ confirmed attendees, probably dues to the weather. I’m always disappointed when the press doesn’t show in a protest in the rain. It’s one thing to get 400 people on a nice day, but it’s MORE impressive to get 100 in the rain.
At any rate, we huddled together and did our thing. I can’t find any articles in any papers on the event. I really just hope we were heard.
Thanks to Garden State Equality for inviting me to speak.
Good on ya!
More proof of the “myth”…so much for claiming a “secular” government.
December 8
On DECEMBER 8, 1863, President Abraham Lincoln announced his plan to
accept back into the Union those who had been in the Confederacy.
He wrote: ”
Whereas it is now desired by some persons heretofore engaged in said
rebellion to resume their allegiance to the United States…
Therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, do
proclaim, declare, and make known to all persons who have, directly
or by implication, participated in the existing rebellion…that a
full pardon is hereby granted to them…with restoration of all
rights of property…upon the condition that every such person shall
take and subscribe an oath…to wit:
“I, ____ ____, do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty God, that I
will henceforth faithfully support, protect, and defend the
Constitution of the United States and the Union of the States
thereunder,
and that I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all
acts of Congress passed during the existing rebellion with reference
to slaves…
and that I will in like manner abide by and faithfully support all
proclamations of the President made during the existing rebellion
having reference to slaves….
So help me God.”
you tell them phreedungpile…..let the human race forever live in fear of their made up superstitious backward thinking bullshit….way to go…..your example sucks if your trying to prove that famous people are making a statement that god exist….The main issue Lincoln addressed, from your example…was over uniting a country that was deeply divided over racism….and I think your stupid religion is part of the root cause of racism…..so your example becomes even more laughable….
leave the idea that ,racism is bad, alone stupid religion…..your bable is full of racism which provides for no credibility at all…
go f yourself religion….
More proof for you Phreedom???
Proof that human beings can be pretty darn ignorant, and pretty sadistic when religion is allowed to control law. This is only a small reason as to why we have the separation of church and state in this country. I’m sure there were much worse attrocities commited by human beings throughout history though. Fortunately, our government is still a work in process, so we’re still weeding out the arcane beliefs of our human evolution. “So help me God” will eventually fall into the history books highlighting the ignorance of human beings through our evolutionary process.
“In September, grand juries indicted eighteen more people. The grand jury failed to indict William Procter, who was re-arrested on new charges. On September 19, 1692, Giles Corey refused to plead at arraignment, and was subjected to peine forte et dure, a form of torture in which the subject is pressed beneath an increasingly heavy load of stones, in an attempt to make him enter a plea. Four pleaded guilty and eleven others were tried and found guilty. On September 22, 1692, eight of those convicted were hanged, reportedly called the “Eight firebrands of Hell” by Salem minister Nicholas Noyes. One of the convicted, Dorcas Hoar, was given a temporary reprieve, with the support of several ministers, to make her confession before God. Aged Mary Bradbury escaped. Abigail Faulkner Sr. was pregnant and given a temporary reprieve (some reports from that era say that Abigail’s reprieve later became a stay of charges, when the courts realized that sentencing Abigail to death would also kill her unborn child, which had committed no crime).
Much, but not all, of the evidence used against the accused was spectral evidence, or the testimony of the afflicted who claimed to see the apparition or the shape of the person who was allegedly afflicting them. The theological dispute that ensued about the use of this evidence centered on whether a person had to give permission to the Devil for his/her shape to be used to afflict. Opponents claimed that the Devil was able to use anyone’s shape to afflict people, but the Court contended that the Devil could not use a person’s shape without that person’s permission; therefore, when the afflicted claimed to see the apparition of a specific person, that was accepted as evidence that the accused had been complicit with the Devil.
At some point in February 1692, likely between the time when the afflictions began but before specific names were mentioned, a neighbor of Rev. Parris, Mary Sibly (aunt of the afflicted Mary Walcott), instructed John Indian, one of the minister’s slaves, to make a witch cake, using traditional English white magic to discover the identity of the witch who was afflicting the girls. The cake, made from rye meal and urine from the afflicted girls, was fed to a dog.
According to English folk understanding of how witches accomplished affliction, when the dog ate the cake, the witch herself would be hurt because invisible particles she had sent to afflict the girls remained in the girls’ urine, and her cries of pain when the dog ate the cake would identify her as the witch. This superstition was based on the Cartesian “Doctrine of Effluvia”, which posited that witches afflicted by the use of “venomous and malignant particles, that were ejected from the eye”, according to the October 8, 1692 letter of Thomas Brattle, a contemporary critic of the trials.
“(some reports from that era say that Abigail’s reprieve later became a stay of charges, when the courts realized that sentencing Abigail to death would also kill her unborn child, which had committed no crime).”
This must be a beautiful example of the “Christian values” this country was founded on. One nation under god! Spare the unborn! Kill the witches! lol
Wow…I couldn’t have responded to your post any more clearly. Try following the the discussion and topic in my post instead of letting the feminine side of you come out and act emotionally…better known as the “Feminization of America”.
One absolute truth in life is that during a debate when one resorts to name calling instead of debating, they are admitting they have the weaker hand…
“One absolute truth in life is that during a debate when one resorts to name calling instead of debating, they are admitting they have the weaker hand…”
I couldn’t agree with you more, which is why I didn’t call you a name. Actually, it’s quite the opposite… “instead of letting the feminine side of you come out”. For the record, I am engaged to a female, and don’t agree with the gay marriage debate.
My comment, “Proof that human beings can be pretty darn ignorant”, was not targeted at your own personal ignorance which is evident in your response to mine, rather human beings historically in general, which is clearly evident in the Salem witch trials of 1692.
Maybe you believe in witches though, which I would have no response to, as that is your personal choice in life.
I guess what raises the hair on the back of my neck more than anything lately, is the belief that this country was based on so called “Christian values.” As evidence, these same people grab feeble statements on a dollar bill “In God We Trust”, or claim “One Nation Under God”, and try and claim that as proof in their convictions. The truth is, not one of these people would have survived colonial rule, as anyone of them could have been accused of witchcraft, and been burned at the stake, raped, tortured, imprisoned, and it all would have been perfectly legal in the eyes of the law. This was a mere 300 years ago in the evolution of our republic. These incidents had to be fresh in the minds of our forefathers, but 300 years later, no one seems to remember or even acknowledge occurred. These were atrocities committed by the early settlers of this nation, who committed treason against England in an effort to avoid paying English taxes. This country was founded on imperialist and capitalist values, and when the indigenous populous of America didn’t conform to our way of life, we killed and drove them into reservations. We then looked to Africa, and kidnapped human beings and forced them into slavery, because the labor was free. We stole this country, and that’s the real history of how the United States came to be. If that’s the “Christian Values” so many people want to claim now, god help us all…
Even when they have, as you have, repetitively demonstrated a willful ignorance, an unwillingness to listen, a destitute lack of self-awareness, an inability to take criticism of any sort from a specific quarter, a penchant for cognitive dissonance, & a repeated schizophrenic readiness to cling to falsehoods regardless of evidence?
You’ve earned every epithet I’ve ever honored you with, phreddy phreddy phallacy master.
Your debate was in reference to “I, ____ ____, do solemnly swear, in presence of Almighty God” and “So help me God.” You referenced a historic document which you claim as evidence against a secular government.
My point is a religiously based government has never historically proven itself to be just, rational, or even remotely sane on many levels. While our current government does possess remnants of our past ignorance, these remnants are not something that should be regarded as a basis to govern our country now. We established the separation of church and state to prevent such incidents as Salem that have occurred throughout the history of our race. That said, our government was established nearly 250 years ago, at a time when theological rule was still a major factor in the implementation of our laws. The fact is, all governments evolved through some sort of theological rule, but that certainly doesn’t make theology a rational substitute for modern law, as was so clearly demonstrated in the Salem witch trials.
Actually I am not sure I would have shown up myself, but you are right it is a shame that with all of the coverage that Christian bigots get in denouncing homosexuals and homosexual marriage. That someone could have at least had some coverage of the event.
What…not even on the LGBT web site? No pictures? So in other words, it may not of even happened? Sure sounds like the makings of a “myth” to me…
How about posting your entire speech to give us a taste of your verbal mastery on the issue?
Hey Dave, you absolutely rocked at the rally! In fact, you and Barry Klassel, the Humanist Chaplain at Rutgers University, and Ron Steelman, the President of Red Bank Humanists, were all great! How cool it was that just before you spoke, everyone was encouraged to move up under the portico of the State House to get out of the worsening rain. What a great memory I’ll always have of all those students – hopefully our future leaders – surrounding you and Barry and Ron as you spoke so eloquently – and forcefully – for marriage equality! Thank you for being there, and for representing American Atheists so well!
Here are a few stories about the rally:
Students join rally for gay marriage rights
http://www.nj.com/news/times/regional/index.ssf?/base/news-18/12600819408230.xml&coll=5
NJ: Your students rallied 3 hours in the rain for marriage equality
http://bluejersey.com/diary/13716/nj-your-students-rallied-3-hours-in-the-rain-for-marriage-equality
Uh oh…was that the kind of “government” support you are looking for Dave? Odd that you aren’t claiming a violation of your myth.
Not odd at all…AA has NEVER been consistent in their complaints about the myth.
P.S. Please share our thanks to Jim MacIver, Hildy and Ray for being there, enduring the weather, and lending their support as well!
Thanks Lisa! At least we got some press! Now I feel better. Good to see you and Tim as well. I’ll post the video of my speech soon.
I don’t see why this is a topic on the AA blog. I am all for gay marriage but this is the AA blog.
Because gay rights are a church/state separation issue. There are no secular arguments against gay equality, only religious objections.
yes. That’s the whole point.
alex:
You obviously missed the ones that are.
Religion has its tentacles into every aspect of life. The thread does not address the specifics of that entanglement and is therefore oddly out of place on this blog.
Oh and there are secular arguments against gay marriage.
Pardon me.
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
I’m sorry, EEWWW! doesn’t count as an argument.
Give me a break! Are you telling me you can’t think of secular arguments against gay
marriage? Oh, and “Eewww!” is just as valid an argument as any religion based argument.
I do not see how this is a matter with which AA should concern itself. AA has limited resources and they should be used in a targeted manner. I support gay organizations so that THEY can challenge the opponents of gay rights.
I surely can. But they all fall flat on their faces (that’s an inferred metaphor, BTW).
I’m assuming that’s your real argument?
Religiously imposed discrimination? You must be yanking me.
To go after them pesky jews, you mean.
Wow, you do live in your own little world, don’t you?
Organizations engage in mutually beneficial relationships – they help each other fund-raise, do favors, pull strings, etc.
You should get out more.
Rice,
I cant think of any compelling or Constitutional arguments against marriage equality, what am I missing?
Godless
There are many heterosexuals who have a negative visceral reaction to homosexuals just as there are many homosexuals who have a positive visceral reaction to other homosexuals. This is simply a fact and it is a fact that forms the most fundamental of premises that such people use in making decision regarding gays.
AA will be feckless if it spreads itself this thin.
Rice,
The ick factor isnt a compelling or Constitutional reason for denying an entire group their equality as guaranteed in the 14th Amendments Equal Protection Clause. You have no argument.
There, that should illustrate just how juvenile that point is. The fact is, that people have civil rights EVEN IF lots of people object. Welcome to America.
Which means people can be educated. This adverse response is a religiously generated piece of cultural programming.
Geez, if you’re so unhappy because AA won’t do precisely what you think it should do, you should go elsewhere.
I am sure both of you think, as do I, that homosexuality is probably genetically encoded. The visceral attraction is encoded. It would not, therefore, be unreasonable to assume that the visceral reaction of some heterosexuals is encoded as well. These visceral reactions become premises in any argument made. You can deny it all you want but the argument exists. You and I, with different premises than some, will reach different logical conclusions. How can you possibly deny this?
KA
Do you always go elsewhere when you are unhappy with something. Me, I voice my opinion and try to change things. You are free to leave as well.
This is still unproven.
So…nobody can even prove the ‘gay gene’, but we should assume this as well? I forget the name of that logical fallacy.
You need to provide something more substantial than this thin premise.
Not w/o proof they don’t. Even if they were ‘encoded’, blaming genetics for bigotry is bullshit.
That’s not an argument, it’s an empty rationale.
I haven’t seen you use logic yet. This certainly isn’t more than idle speculation.
All valid points. I suggest getting a petition going. Or maybe writing your congressman.
Rice and KA,
As a gay man I can assure you that being gay, for men anyway, is in no way a choice and that the current evidence supports a genetic and hormonal origin. In other words it is innate. I agree that many heterosexual men have a visceral reaction to male homosexuality in the same way that I have a visceral reaction to heterosexual sex (disgusting beyond belief!) and an involuntary fight or flight reaction to black folks. The difference between you and me, Rice, is that I would never advocate restricitng the rights of straight or black people and instead I just avoid them in my private life just as you are free to avoid us queers in your private life but you have no right to restrict our equality; the Constitution guarantees equality for all.
Godless
I never stated that I was against gay marriage. As a matter of fact I think it is a great idea for the world of today. You stated that there was no secular argument against gay equality and I said there is. I think I have stated it well.
That there’s a genetic component to homophobia? Got proof?
Depends on what you mean by proof. Our heterosexuality is definitely genetically encoded. People with negative visceral reactions to homosexuality are almost exclusively heterosexuals.
Evidence? Scientific studies?
Most individuals tend to be bisexual, until taught otherwise. But homosexuality being genetic, the jury’s still out.
It’s obviously a cultural thing. It’s 1 of the excuses the bibble uses to genocide entire groups of people.
KA
You don’t have children do you. Bisexual until taught otherwise? Hogwash.
I have a stepson. Sexuality isn’t necessarily hard-wired into us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bisexuality
Bisexuality is sexual behavior with or physical attraction to both sexes (male and female), or a bisexual orientation. People who have a bisexual orientation “can experience sexual, emotional, and affectional attraction to both their own sex and the opposite sex”; “it also refers to an individual’s sense of personal and social identity based on those attractions, behaviors expressing them, and membership in a community of others who share them.” It is one of the three main classifications of sexual orientation, along with a heterosexual and a homosexual orientation. Individuals who lack a strong sexual attraction to either sex are known as asexual.
Bisexuality has been observed in various human societies and elsewhere in the animal kingdom throughout recorded history. The term bisexuality, however, like the terms hetero- and homosexuality, was coined in the 19th century.
The stereotypical concept is that the urge is evenly divided, but this is not so.
Can you provide any evidence whatsoever, or are you going to run around making bald assertions w/o any supporting proof (again!)? We’re talking serious evidence, not idle speculation.
Strange that you would post a wiki excerpt that does not support your assertion.
The secular argument which was asked of me has been made and it is perfectly logical.
Oh sorry, I forget subtlety is lost on you.
You’re suggesting something as confused, diverse, & incredibly complex as sex is easily broken down into 3 categories, all of which are ‘hard-coded’. The only item on the menu is that the human animal requires sexual release.
You can be logical, & still be wrong. I’ll tell you what I tell the religious: analogical arguments are not evidential proofs.
I didn’t write that there were three categories nor did I offer an “analogical argument”. Stop twisting what I did write and grasping at straws to save face.
You’re claiming that being gay is hard-coded. That’s fine, but you offer zero evidence. You then claim that homophobia is hard-coded, & you offer the same amount of evidence: zero. I keep asking for evidence, you keep refusing to provide it. You also suggest that there has to be 2 to 3 categories by inferring that something is ‘hard-coded’ – you’d have to reduce something to a simpler basic category, because there’s way too many variables otherwise.
You did so provide an analogical argument, by suggesting that if being gay is hard-coded, so then is homophobia.
Look it up – http://philosophy.hku.hk/think/arg/analogy.php
Quit squirming junior. Obviously you haven’t thought this out properly.
You have got to be kidding! Our genetics plays a role – a big one – in every aspect of animal behavior. Still grasping at straws.
You have written a lot of irrational stuff but this one is hilariously irrational:
No I’m not. I maintain that homophobia is a learned cultural response. It’s just as logical as your assertion, & requires less evidence.
On the contrary, I’m the rational person here. Just because your cronies @ the local pub nod @ your ‘brilliance’, doesn’t make it particularly bright.
I am always open to evidence. You however, don’t seem to feel the need to supply it.
In fact, your unwillingness to even adequately defend your views marks you as either A. a complete newbie, or B. a shallow thinker.
You could ask me for evidence that the sky is blue or you could look out your window.
Apples to oranges. Are there any logical fallacies you don’t commit?
Do you even know what a logical fallacy is? Do you understand that they do not follow from fundamental principles of logic but are rather something akin to debating rules for snobs. Maybe that’s why these fallacies did not appear in any of the logic texts I used as an undergrad!
Do you know, is more the question.
You committed another 1 right there.
So…you’re an undergrad? Is it too much to ask that you show your work?
Apparently.
Did I say that I am an undergrad? Your reading comprehension is rather poor.
You said that you were.
“Were” not “am”. Oye.
So I didn’t use the proper tense.
Grow up.
To Rice
Actually that is one of the weakness’ of the Atheist movement is its narrow application of it’s movement. There are probably dozens of groups that do not want Christian beliefs to be supported by or enforced by secular law or Government sanctions. Whether it is homosexual rights groups, smaller non Christian Theist groups, separation of church and state groups. Many of which have their own agenda’s but all want to neutralize Christian influence on the secular level.
The problem is that there is no organized and focused effort to fight Christianity by these many groups. If you are stung by 300 bees one bee per day it might sicken you or weaken you but it is unlikely to kill you. If on the other hand all 300 bees sting you all in one minute, and then again a week later, and a week later chances are it will kill you. If these groups built a PAC call it (People against Christian authority) and fund it and give up some of their resources to allow it to attack the Christian religion and their perceived authority.
And the only agenda of this PAC is to challenge day in and day out the Christian religion their power and authority will diminish. If every time a evangelical or fundamentalist opened his/her mouth to spout their garbage someone is there to say, you lie, your bible lies you do not speak for your God/Jesus. They would go on the defensive and have little time to worry about what others are doing or with whom they are doing it with. As long as these groups act separately non will succeed. If they unite under the PAC and the PAC’s sole agenda is to diminish the authority and power of the Christian religion they can succeed.
As a great man once said United we stand, divided we fall.
rice says:
December 7, 2009 at 1:36 am
Great point rice!
Atheism in America basically has 3 major groups that make up their numbers.
1. Those raised in a household with little or no religion.
2. Those who have been hurt in some way by the church.
3. Homosexuals.
It’s my opinion that #3 is the largest group of atheists in America. Dave and the other board members for AA are simply bowing to those who fund them the most…
phreedm
Homosexuals probably were at one time largest group in american atheism but that is no longer the case i believe, now that many churchs are accepting homosexuality.
The largest group of atheists in America are educated wealthy whites in the urban Northeast and Northwest and those under the age of 35. Us gays make up somewhere between 5-10% of the general population and in no way could we begin to represent the numbers of Americans who now report being nonreligious. Having said that, gays tend to be atheists at a much higher rate than straights which is no surprise given the view that the three Abrahamic desert death cults take on the issue.
Phreedm
You are pathetically misinformed. Your three groups do not include me our any of my too many to count atheist friends.
All 3 are opinions actually, as there has never been a formal scientific study to draw any such conclusions.
I happen to have been raised in a very religious household, with 6 siblings. I am the only Atheist in the bunch, although I do hesitate to categorize myself in such a manner. I simply see more rational reasons for my convictions in life. God is a theory based on very weak, or even non existent evidence. It is about faith, not facts. Faith cannot be debated, as the definition of faith itself requires no proof. I could just as easily make the statement that the religious are primarily made up of delusional people, but that would be an opinion, not fact.
I have never been hurt by religion or the church.
I am not homosexual.
With bank failures,rising unemployment,foreclosures even people in favor of same sex marriage are very much distracted.
Today is pearl habor day time to plant another mushroom in japan just to let them know we haven’t forgotten.Canada your smug ass is next.
To Reason
Japan did a preemptive strike on us before we could do a preemptive strike on them, everything we were doing, Hawaii, Midway Island, Wake Island all of these things were designed to give us the ability to threaten and intimidate the Japanese into submission to our authority.
Mark
I respect both japan and canada.I would consider an attack on either nation to be like and attack on us in usa.It is sad to see people in third world nations miss out on the benefit of rule of law and self gov’t like canada and japan enjoy.
If 2 people can legally have sex then they should be able to marry.No religious order should be forced to perform or acknowledge a marriage contrary to its beliefs.I do like that some churchs try to educate the couple before the vows.
Did Rice ever give its secular argument against giving back dignity to same sex couples
The only secular “argument” rice has against gay equality is the ick argument which of course has no legal standing in America. I have a feeling that rice may have been raised in a gay hating religious environment and later became an atheist but was unable to shed this baggage which is, of course, rices right. Most homophobic atheists follow this pattern.
Godless
What on earth are you talking about? If you were not so reactionary you would have noticed that I was being asked (BY YOU) to furnish a secular argument. I was not asked (BY YOU) to furnish my opinion on the matter. I gave my opinion (see above) only after YOU accused me of having an opinion contrary to my actual opinion. Got it?
Careful with the questions you ask.
Yes, because the new whiz kid, fried rice, likes to make blatant blather w/o anything to back it up, or use his grey matter to flesh it out. “Because I said so!” isn’t an argument either.
All mouth & trousers, that one.
Homophobic beliefs are no different then Christian beliefs. As long as those beliefs are held as being personal and individual and given no more weight then personal opinion and no secular laws or government weight are applied to those beliefs. Then as in all things any individual has the right to their own opinions and beliefs so long as those beliefs do no harm to another.
EXACTLY! which is why barring gays from marriage is unAmerican, unConstitutional, and morally wrong. A persons private religious beliefs are not a basis for denying another group of their equality. Its so simple a retarded child could understand it yet it seems to be beyond the grasp of many religious folks in America.
To godless sodomite
Your right the problem that we face though is that Christians view the world thru their bible and doctrine glasses. The constitution, bill of rights and the simple understanding of what is right mean nothing to them. If the bible says they can persecute people without just cause this is what they follow. If their bible says that they can subjugate all who do not believe as they do, then that is what they follow.
As I keep repeating Christian evangelicals and fundamentalists cannot be reasoned with, they cannot be convinced about anything that is not within the bounds of their bible or priesthood teachings. The only way to challenge them is to challenge the foundation upon which their beliefs stand. That is why I constantly say the bible lies and the priesthoods lie, that it is a false religion. And show the lies when challenged. This is the only way to challenge the fundamentalists and evangelicals.
“Religion is far more of a choice than homosexuality. And the protections
that we have for religion — we protect religion. And talk about a
lifestyle choice — that is absolutely a choice… It’s a travesty that people have forced someone who is gay to have to make their case that they deserve
the same basic rights as someone else…” – Jon Stewart
Sodomy can be a source of infection and injury.Lewd and lascivious conduct has brought death and destruction to many in the homosexual community.Passing a strong electric current thru the body on a repeated basis could provide a cure.The trick is to provide a strong enough jolt to cause the brain to rewire without killing or inflicting serious brain damage on the subject.
The anti psychotic medication only works if you take it, reason.
Someone has to lighten the mood there is so much bad news in press now.Don’t tell me it didn’t make you smile.Hey on a serious note any good news on diabetes research lately.
With Obama seeing to fewer restrictions on stem cell research now in the USA the cure for Type 1 diabetes inches closer and closer. Hell, they might even be able to clone limbs for transplant in the not too terribly distant future.
5 american students arrested in pakistan as suspected jihadists.What are things coming to.
Curious. When over 500 people were injured and over 125 were killed in a bombing in Iraq just a couple of days ago you didn’t ask “What are things coming to”. Curious. Very curious. The death and destruction that we have brought to Iraq makes these little half baked jihadi wannabees insignificant blips on my what-are-things-coming-to radar.
“A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she sahll be executed.”
Deuteronomy 22 13-21
So why isnt there a movement among xians to execute non virgin women? if its all about protecting the sanctity of biblical marriage this should be a bigger priority than banning gays from marriage. Especially when you consider that the bible has nothing to say about gays getting married but its very clear on the fate of women who arent virgin on their wedding night.
Good point. Off with their heads!
To godless sodomite
Also keep in mind that Divorce was forbidden by Jesus. He rejected Moses’ allowing of divorce, and said that Moses allowed it not because God allowed it, Moses allowed it simply because he was tired of the whining of the Jewish men. And that God does not allow divorce. And yet Christianity allows divorce which is a far greater threat to marriage then gay marriage can ever be.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/11/30/national/a111733S84.DTL
To godless sodomite
I hope it succeeds if I ever see it on the ballot I will vote yes.