Responsibility for ones actions

Wow, the crazies are going… crazy… this week.

So the bigots who gave money to pass Prop 8 are bawwing about how theyre being persecuted by homosexual terrorists, thus laws must be changed for their personal comfort. Not happy with taking away homosexuals right to marriage, they now want people to be able to donate large sums of money to political campaigns anonymously:

Proposition 8 proponents’ complaint that a California campaign-finance disclosure law has led to harassment of same-sex marriage opponents failed today to sway a federal judge, who refused to throw out the law or shield donors’ names.

Lawyers for Protect Marriage, sponsor of the constitutional amendment that won voter approval Nov. 4, said contributors have already faced consumer boycotts, picketing and even death threats after the state posted their names and other information in mandatory campaign reports.

Alas, the activist judge on the bench wouldnt let them overturn another law to suit their bigotry:

But U.S. District Judge Morrison England, after a one-hour hearing in Sacramento, said California’s $100 reporting requirement – adopted by the voters in 1974 – is a valid means of informing the public about the financing of ballot measure campaigns.

“If there ever needs to be sunshine on a particular issue, it’s a ballot measure,” England said, observing that initiatives are often sponsored by committees with misleading names.

Misleading names… like ‘Protect Marriage’? *high-fives judge*

Oh, but what about the poor, poor persecution of those good Christians that voted to take away other citizens rights?

Some of the reprisals reported by the Prop. 8 committee involve legal activities such as boycotts and picketing, England said. He said other alleged actions, such as death threats, mailings of white powder and vandalism, may constitute “repugnant and despicable acts” but can be reported to law enforcement.

Even if there have been illegal reprisals, that would be insufficient reason to grant a wholesale exemption for a multimillion-dollar campaign with thousands of donors, the judge said.

Death threats!

You mean like the ‘death threats’ Sally Kern got a while back after she boldly went against the radical Christian party-line and said gays were ‘worse than terrorists’? Except she didnt get any death threats? She just exaggerated so she could cum harder to her persecution fantasies? Or those nice Christian children who were viciously attacked by a gang of blood-thirsty gay men? Except they werent actually ‘attacked’? Technically, they were the aggressors?

One thing that has always bothered me about radical theists is their lack of internal locus of control. They are not responsible for their actions. They arent responsible for what happens to them. Its always someone elses fault. They need protecting from the consequences of their own actions, even if those consequences are legal, just, and entirely expected.

Poor little babies.

Comments

  1. #1 dreikin
    January 30, 2009

    Of course – that’s the result of “giv[ing] your life up to god” – they’re basically meat-puppets of their holy books and priests/pastors/clergy.

  2. #2 Prometheus
    January 30, 2009

    “One thing that has always bothered me about radical theists is their lack of internal locus of control. They are not responsible for their actions. They arent responsible for what happens to them. Its always someone elses fault.”

    I understand your frustration and I applaud your very rational and pragmatic effort to seat this phenomenon within the taxonomy of a social learning disorder.

    However,

    This is not a psychological event so much as opportunistic identity politics. By posing as victims of externalities they not only avoid culpability they add the perceived moral superiority we grant actual victims of persecution.

    Your model is not a bad one, it is just not skeptical enough. Theists use a pre-Aristotelian style of argument that could be described as preemptive sophistry. When they suspect they are about to be caught cheating they turn over the table and accuse everyone else of clipping cards.

    They know exactly what they are doing.

  3. #3 The Science Pundit
    January 30, 2009

    I’ll sign the petition! (… provided nobody ever finds out that I signed the petition.)

  4. #4 James F
    January 30, 2009

    Well, to be fair, they might be targeted by the same group of gay banditos who are out to destroy the American family. Just ask Lewis Black.

  5. #5 Richard Wolford
    January 30, 2009

    Hey hey now, don’t make fun of teh Gay Terrorists! They’ve been known to sneak into homes late at night and…and…redecorate!!!

    Seriously, what’s the deal with all the gay bashers? Do they have nothing else to do? Shouldn’t they be praying or something?

  6. #6 Andrés Diplotti
    January 30, 2009

    Oh, poor babies! They’re being viciously persecuted!

  7. #7 Sili
    January 30, 2009

    Yeah. My shrink calls that the “extroïsing” character (*is introïsing*). One of the characteristics of psychopathic personalities.

    Not that all extros are thereby psychos, of course.

  8. #8 jason
    January 30, 2009

    Except she didnt get any death threats? She just exaggerated so she could cum harder to her persecution fantasies?

    *gag!* That was an awful image! Have you no respect for my stomach / its contents?

    *tear*

  9. #9 The Ridger
    January 30, 2009

    When your identity is based on your religion, and your religion tells you that you will be persecuted – and further, that you’re only blessed IF you’re persecuted – then you’ve got a problem when you run the country.

    Also, these same assholes take license plates at women’s clinic and harass people. I have no sympathy for them.

  10. #10 foxfire
    January 30, 2009

    So given the current world-wide economic situation (shit that happens when a species over breeds, recklessly uses resources, persists in rewarding cheaters and generally refuses to use it’s cognitive resources), any bets on the next complex life form that will dominate our fair planet?

    I’m putting my “money” (what’s left of it) on something that survives out of Hymenoptera.

    Sorry for the use of things like apostrophes. I’m old. Kuddos to you Abby for your incredible sense of humor, intelligence and ability to articulate, and determination to change things and not give up.

    Any thoughts on the moronic woman who, with 6 kids, did a fertility thingie and just delivered 8 more hominids to occupy our increasingly less “fair” planet?

  11. #11 dvizard
    February 1, 2009

    Still, I think it is not entirely unreasonable to want to protect the identities of campaign sponsors. Suppose, for example, that you live in a Bible Belt fundie-Christian town and want to sponsor, say, a campaign for better separation of church and state. Since we all know how loving Christians are towards other people, I personally would prefer my name protected in that case – this supports my freedom to vote for / support what I think is correct, as opposed to what peer pressure tells me to do.

  12. #12 Eric Saveau
    February 1, 2009

    @dvizard-
    That’s a legitimate point, but it points directly to how this started – When the Prop Hate thing began, the Xian hatemonger brigade was loudly screaming about how important it was to find out who was opposing their campaign and get their names out into the open. Now that the opposition is digging into their identities, they suddenly have a concern over privacy rights. This is just one more graphic illustration of their grotesque hypocrisy.

  13. #13 Monado
    February 7, 2009

    My mother boycotted Shell Oil for seven years because they were the first company she heard misusing the tune of a song for their radio jingle. And we both closed our accounts at the Royal Bank of Canada when they announced that they could not find a woman who was qualified to sit on their board of directors. That was about 35 years ago and neither of us has needed an account there since. (Come to think of it, something like that happened between the church and me.)

    I can hardly wait to see how long and how thorough some of these boycotts, based in a far greater outrage, will be.

  14. #14 Monado
    February 7, 2009

    P.S. Where can I find the list? Maybe I can play, too!

  15. #15 Monado
    February 7, 2009

    Proposition 8 donors pro and con: SFgate link to database

  16. #16 Monado
    February 7, 2009

    Lots of churches–Please send their names to the tax agency so they can lose their tax-free status for 2008 and 2009.

    And here’s a fat one:
    Contributor name Todd Leany
    Occupation Vice President
    Employer PACIFIC COAST STEEL
    City Las Vegas
    State or country NV
    ZIP
    Position Support
    Amount $5,000.00
    Payment type Monetary
    Transaction date 11/13/2008
    Committee name ProtectMarriage.com – Yes On 8, A Project Of California Renewal

    I wonder how many companies use Pacific Coast Steel in their products? I wonder how many of them would like to hear about why you’re not buying their products any more.

  17. #17 Monado
    February 7, 2009

    You’d think marrying your niece off to some old lecher would show a lot more disrespect of marriage…

    The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints Support $30,354.85 UT Salt Lake City 11/3/08
    The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints Support $2,864.21 UT Salt Lake City 11/1/08 Details
    The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints Support $2,078.97 UT Salt Lake City 10/25/08 Details
    The Church Of Jesus Christ Of Latter-Day Saints Support $19,715.08 UT Salt Lake City 6/23/08

    This one doesn’t have a company, it is a company:
    Contributor name Hartford Holdings, LLC
    City Provo
    State or country UT
    ZIP
    Position Support
    Amount $300,000.00
    Payment type Monetary
    Transaction date 10/31/2008

The site is undergoing maintenance presently. Commenting has been disabled. Please check back later!