Situational ethics

You gotta love the chutzpah of the special rights crowd.

It seems that the anti-gay organizers behind Prop 8 in California wanted to prevent public disclosure of donors to their campaign, and filed a lawsuit to overturn a state campaign finance law – a law that was enacted by voter referendum in 1974. They just lost that case. Sorry, there’s no special right to make secret donations to a controversial campaign.

Not that this comes as any surprise, but now we know: When we hear from anti-gay activists about their great reverence for “the will of the people,” and when they gravely intone that “the people have spoken,” they don’t really mean it. Like their faux reverence for “families,” it’s purely situational and amoral. It doesn’t apply when “the people” have inconvenienced their agenda.

As an old headline from The Onion once warned, Bottom Of Barrel Dangerously Overscraped.

This entry was posted in Commentary, News and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Situational ethics

  1. Not Jeff W. says:

    Can anyone tell me why the Rainbow is the sign for the GLBT community? Always wondered about this.

  2. David says:

    Not Jeff,

    It was adopted in the late 70’s because the gay liberation movement needed a universally recognizable symbol – and then it became instantly recognizable because of all the attention on the Milk/Moscone assassinations. The rainbow has a lot of symbolic meanings – diversity being the obvious one – and also is the sign of safety given to God’s people in the Judeo-Christian tradition.

    Here’s a site with explanations of some common symbols: http://www.lambda.org/symbols.htm#Rainbow

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *