recent quotes from congressmen on recent votes...

[acroyear]

on yesterday's Gay Marriage amendment vote:

Rep. John Carter (R-TX): "The reality is, marriage has always been a union between a man and a woman. Now in China, they might say a civil union. In Rome they might say a church union. But it's always been a union between a man and a woman. In my faith, I believe it's part of God's plan for the future of mankind."

Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN): "I believe first, though, marriage should be protected because it wasn't our idea. Several millennia ago, the words were written that a man should leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife and the two should become one flesh. It wasn't our idea. It was God's idea."

Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-CO): "We celebrate the fact that we were all created equal by our Creator -- equal, but different, and for a purpose. He showed us that purpose in the Garden of Eden, Adam and Eve ... And marriage since the beginning of time, as close as I can tell, has been between a man and a woman. And if it was indeed good enough for our Creator and it was indeed our Creator's plan that we were created different for an absolute divine purpose, I think we best not be messing with His plan today. "

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA): "This is all about marriage that results, or potentially can result, in the procreation of children. And this is what our Constitution has implied for 223 years, and indeed, what the word of God has implied for 2,000 years ... But I do know a little bit about the sacrament of marriage, Mr. Speaker, as one of about 200 Catholic members of the United States Congress. And I think God has spoken very clearly, very clearly, on this issue."

Translation: separation of church and state is absolutely an unknown to these idiots, and their faith alone decided their vote, not their constituents or any adherance to reason or even the REAL history of this country. They really have no idea that their very words spit venom on every ideal the Constitution is meant to endow and protect.

I'm still trying to figure out where this "purpose" attitude comes from (which also drives their anti-evolution rhetoric - creation without God as they see evolution means creation without "purpose" or "direction" is a common argument of theirs).  36 years as an Episcopalian and I'd never heard of it 'til this shit made it to the public square.  For all their Biblical literalism, they simply aren't aware that the Bible itself NEVER uses purpose to describe the creation of Man as a whole, or even creation as a whole, aside from some easily misinterpreted references in Paul.  God personally never said it except a direct reference to Pharough in Exodus 9, and Jesus did not at any point use the term "purpose" in any of the Gospels.  The core "purpose" argument that directly is a reference to man is in Revelation, when he describes the purpose of the sinners to the Beast, whatever that is (and as I've said before, I reject Revelation and all of the hatred it has spawned).  Paul's use of "purpose" throughout the epistles is his own in sharing his interpretation of God, not God's.

In other words, this "purpose" never existed.  It was a dogmatic creation of MAN's, likely from the Catholics initially, long-since discarded as unnecessary.  For all the "fundementals" of the so-called Biblical literalists out there, this purpose argument of theirs isn't Biblically defensable.

Comments

[anjabeth.livejournal.com]

And from a strictly historical standpoint, I always laugh when they say "One Man - One Woman, that's God's Law, that's the way it's always been!" Um, no actually - throughout most of recorded history, it's usually been One Man, Lots of Women. But I'm afraid if we tell them that, they'll start pushing for a restoration of polygamy. ;p