Alice Meichi Li [李美姿] ([info]alicemeichi) wrote,
@ 2008-11-07 23:07:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Entry tags:art, politics

Church v. State

I painted this illustration as a way of expressing my frustration at the way America has been heading in recent years.

In spite of the incredible step forward recently in the election of Barack Obama, the passing of Proposition 8 shows that we have a long way to go as a nation. In recent years more than ever, right-wing politics has brought religion into the equation -- an exercise that casts incredible aspersions on the very foundations of this nation.

One of the first cornerstones of America called for the separation of Church and State, and yet issues such as abortion and gay rights have absolutely no redeeming features in a secular context. How have we, as citizens in this Land of the Free, come to spit in the face of our Founding Fathers? They, above all, knew that religion pollutes politics and vice versa.

Christians don't deny Atheists any rights, and Atheism goes against the First Commandment. Why should they deny any rights to homosexuals from a few verses in the Bible?

Live, and let fucking live.


(17 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]digital_dima
2008-11-08 05:19 am UTC (link)
But... but... THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 04:55 am UTC (link)
You mean, the children who have to grow up with gay polygamous parents who indulge in bestiality??? OH NOES.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]digital_dima
2008-11-10 05:00 am UTC (link)
Yep... those would be the ones.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]e_apollo
2008-11-08 06:47 am UTC (link)
... as if their happiness is harmful. It's not. it amazes me how much effort these people put into breaking up innocent people's lifestyles over - what? it if it's also disgust? just "looks bad"? I think some straight couples disgust me too! Would that count?


---

Great illustration. Brainzzzz. Melting. Perfect.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 04:59 am UTC (link)
Seriously -- the reason Separation of Church and state was brought about was to protect the citizens' practice of religion... be it Christianity, Judaisim, Islam, Buddism, Hinduism, etc... Why should one religion have more legislative influence than any other?

Thanks. :)

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]tinpan
2008-11-08 07:09 am UTC (link)
oooh this looks like your first genuinely editorial piece. Send it out!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 04:59 am UTC (link)
Thanks!! I thought I'd try it out. XD And I totally will.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]seleschan
2008-11-08 03:06 pm UTC (link)
Wow, very powerful image for a powerful though! :hugs:

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 04:59 am UTC (link)
Thank you. :) ::Hugs back::

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]etoilepb
2008-11-08 03:13 pm UTC (link)
The variety of "Christian" that would go around trying to codify the exclusivity of their beliefs into law has no more respect for atheists than it does for gays. Christianist lawmaking harms both the law and Christianity.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 05:02 am UTC (link)
That's very true, but they haven't tried to take any civil liberties away from Atheists (yet)... I remember back when I was a Junior in high school, my Christian Doctrine teacher passed these pamphlets out that called for a proposition which took away ALL civil rights from gays. :/ And named ridiculous reasons, such as how gays make a higher income than heterosexuals or whatever to incite jealousy/bitterness. When he asked for the pamphlets back to pass around to the next class, I stood up and tore my copy up in front of him. A few people applauded, but most started spreading "rumors" that I was gay.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]monkeyhitman
2008-11-08 03:32 pm UTC (link)
The passage of these measures reflects a conservative majority, however slim that is.

What happened to the Senate, however, shows that Republicans lost seats despite social conservatives having a larger majority of this year's vote. (California and Florida both voted Obama.)

So, it actually shows that, at least in this election, running on a socially conservative platform was not enough to win the votes. People have spoken for a change in their elected government but voted conservatively on other issues.

Two steps foward, one step back. Still a long ways for us to go, indeed.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-10 05:05 am UTC (link)
The problem, as I see it, is that people still vote for selfish interests rather than trying to protect their fellow citizens and their rights. It's the difference between a millionaire voting Democrat because they figure they could stand to lose a couple thousand a year for the good of the economy or voting Republican because they want to keep their private jet running. :/

Those who voted for Prop 8 either voted out of fear/discrimination of homosexuals or because they were following what their church told them like sheep. Never once has it entered their mind that they might be wrecking their fellow Americans' lives.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]evilianly
2008-11-11 07:23 am UTC (link)
Oddly enough, our fcked up state passed Prop 2, which mandates that farm animals have adequate room to move around, stretch, etc.

Yet, we're denying gay folks who have no choice in who they are the rights granted to "normal" people.

Every time I saw a pro-Prop8 sign, it made me livid. They claimed that a yes vote would protect children in schools, promote equality, and protect marriage. It's so misleading when the pro-8 people had signs that had a website called "www.protectmarriage.org."

The entirety of prop 8 is this:
"
Section 1: Title
This measure shall be known and may be sited as the "California Marriage Protection Act."

Section 2: Section 7.5 is added to Article I of the California Constitution to read:
Section 7.5 Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California."

Since where does it say that a no vote will force children to know about same-sex marriage, destroy families, and lead to disintegrating morals? This is nearly a definition clause in the constitution. When idiots start treating this stuff like the elastic clause, you know we're screwed when people start believing in the bullshit they spew out.

When I looked at the vote breakdown by race, whites were slightly in disfavor, hispanics were slightly in favor, and blacks were strongly in favor of Prop 8.

While California overwhelmingly voted for Obama, Obama also did not support passage of Prop 8, despite supposed distaste for gay marriage. Of all people that I would have hoped to understand the plight of the repressed minority, I thought the African-American community would have understood. But alas, they don't learn from their lessons (or maybe they have and would rather be the people that continue the cycle).

So in conclusion, California would rather give rights to animals, and take them away from gays.

The only real social highlights I would consider reasonable was the rejection of the parental notification of a minor's abortion. Not everyone lives in a supportive and happy-go-lucky family, and I'm glad it didn't pass.

But if nothing else, we'll get that high speed rail that joins San Francisco with San Diego. Even if it is expensive, at least it'll provide jobs and a really cool engineering marvel that the other industrialized countries enjoy now.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-11 09:30 pm UTC (link)
I thought the African-American community would have understood. But alas, they don't learn from their lessons (or maybe they have and would rather be the people that continue the cycle).

I don't think it's fair to place the blame on African-Americans as a culture for this.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/11/7/34645/1235/704/656272

The blame is squarely on religion. After all, it was the Mormons who heavily funded Prop 8. Of course, there were black people who voted due to religion and there is no excuse for that. My point is that we shouldn't turn to just one race as a scapegoat.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]evilianly
2008-11-11 11:40 pm UTC (link)
I understand that their religion played the biggest part in it. Even the Catholic church made a huge push to support 8 as well, but the Hispanics who are usually very religious only barely supported the measure. I originally thought that the Hispanic population would have overwhelmingly voted for prop 8, and that the blacks would be 50/50. Turns out it was the other way around. But let's assume that poll conducted by CNN was severely flawed as speculated. We all know religion was what caused the passage, but my main gripe was that people decided to fall on religion instead of their experience to vote. Again, expectations were turned upside-down, and that was what upset me the most.

I was more upset that a majority of people who voted for the issue didn't see the measure as an issue of rights and equality for all, just about gay marriage. (Actually, the pro-8 people really really twisted it so bad it made me want to puke.) CNN probably unfairly concluded that blacks overwhelmingly voted for prop 8, but it doesn't excuse anyone for voting for prop 8, because a lot of every race was responsible for its passage.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]alicemeichi
2008-11-12 03:23 am UTC (link)
Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying. There's been a lot of race-baiting going on lately, and I just wanted to assuage that.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(17 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…