Doug Stanhope, Marriage, Separation o' Church/State

[Hayden]

Doug Stanhope is an atheist, loud mouthed, filthy comedian filling the shoes of Carlin and Hicks.


I'll just let the clip speak for itself:






I thought that was pretty cool.

[dvdbwn]

it's great to have someone willing to fight but it was a little misguided. the prayer was perfectly lovely. all he really did was convolute the two separate issues of gay marriage and separation of church and state. i'm in favor of both but we'd be better served to win christians who are on the fence to our side of the debate. it's important to remember not all christians are anti-gay. so he probably shouldn't have if tried to piss the christians off before the vote on a separate issue. you have to think about what the goal is... his goal was to make a stink and draw attention to himself by pushing buttons, which probably did more to endanger the issue than support it.

i'm glad it passed though.

[Pix]

That wasn't a prayer, it was a sermon.

I'll be glad when preachers like this aren't the type to be asked to give the invocations from city hall to the inauguration of the POTUS for the same reason Westboro Baptists aren't.

[Hayden]

@Dvdbwn

I understand why you feel that way. I disagree a bit though.

He may have been wanting to draw attention to himself (but most people's actions are at least partly motivated out of self interest, right?) but I think he also genuinely wanted to draw attention to the issue. He is a public figure of sorts and has a spotlight to shine where he pleases. If the church planned on bussing in a bunch of folks to make a scene, then why can't one guy just because he has a platform?

As for the prayer, I don't think I would've been able to be as calm and composed if I were in Doug's position. It is absolutely ridiculous, exclusionary, and unconstitutional to begin a public government council meeting with a religious ceremony. It immediately sends a message to unbelievers and religious folks not of monotheistic, Judeo-Christian theology that their efforts and thoughts amount to naught. Pray on your own time, pray in church, fine. That's what they're there for. This is a city council meeting. A place of civil, public inclusive discourse. Completely uncalled for.

But I understand what you mean about not wanting to isolate the Christians. But I would think that any Christian upset that a preacher wouldn't be able to open a city council meeting with a prayer is probably not going to be won over anyway. So fuck 'em.

[Hayden]

I'll be glad when preachers like this aren't the type to be asked to give the invocations from city hall to the inauguration of the POTUS for the same reason Westboro Baptists aren't.

That's why religion and politics don't, and shouldn't, mix. It gets messy real fast.

[dvdbwn]

That wasn't a prayer, it was a sermon.

I'll be glad when preachers like this aren't the type to be asked to give the invocations from city hall to the inauguration of the POTUS for the same reason Westboro Baptists aren't.

whatever you want to call it, there was overtly offensive in it. i kept waiting for the pastor to say something to piss me off and it never came.

[Hayden]

whatever you want to call it, there was overtly offensive in it. i kept waiting for the pastor to say something to piss me off and it never came.

I'm curious. Are you a Christian? Your profile says you worship regularly.

[Hayden]

I'm too impatient to wait for an answer.

I'm going to proceed under the assumption that you are, as it is likely you being American and all. I apologize if you're not.

That's super cool that you're a Christian and you have faith and everything. No problem. But not everyone is a Christian. In fact, not everyone believes in God. And belief in God has a lot of baggage connected to it; not for everyone individually, but as a social force.

City council meetings are meant to be a place where everyone who is a part of the community can feel welcome and equal so as to foster the best possible discourse. This is not possible when you're making certain people feel as though they do not belong at the get-go.

Not to mention the fact that governmental institutions should not be influenced WHATSOEVER by any particular religious dogma. It's a place of logic and people of faith need to put that faith at the door when making decisions for the community. It doesn't mean you can't believe what you want to believe. Separation of church and state and all that. You're beliefs are no more special than anyone else's and you should not get preferential treatment (even if you're the vast majority) in public settings.

[Hayden]

Random quote from the sermon/prayer:

"Heavenly father, we come in your name this evening."

No. That's false. They didn't all come in his name that evening, obviously. How horrible for that preacher man to assume that everyone at the council meeting is of the same faith as he is. What does that imply? It implies that the only people who matter at the meeting are Christians, and it also implies that they, the "Christians," will not be operating from a place of logic, but by speaking for their god, which means they don't have to take responsibility for their actions and votes because they're only doing god's work. You don't get to push religious dogma on a supposedly multi-religious/non-religious population. That is called a theocracy.

Christianity is not the default setting on the human experience.

You may think I'm overreacting. But try to see that the reason you don't have a problem with it is only because of the fact that you are a member of the tribe that is receiving the special treatment. Empathy.


P.S.

Do I get a pat on the back for being mature about "Heavenly father, we COME in your name this evening?"

[dvdbwn]

but what your proposing doesn't make everyone feel welcome, it flip-flops who feels unwelcome. how are christians to feel welcome and equal if you deny them free speech? while i agree his beliefs shouldn't have opened the proceedings or be forced on anyone, he does, as a citizen have just as much right to stand up and speak before the council. just because you forbid christians from praying in a civil venue isn't going to stop them from being motivated by their beliefs.

if we're not willing to be tolerant of christians how can we expect christians to be tolerant of gays? saying they need to keep their lifestyle in their churches is tantamount to them saying gays should flaunt their "alternative lifestyle". this discussion is cracking me up because i'm so liberal. i would be equally not offended if the vote was opened by an atheist, muslim, buddhist, or whoever. the thing is, had it not been referred to as a prayer and not contained a reference to his religion, it would have been a well received monologued that called for wisdom and level-headedness.