This still doesn’t justify opposition

Many opponents of marriage equality often justify their opposition on religious grounds. The essence of all this is basically the belief that gay sex (or homosexuality), is a sin. In actuality, such a belief does not actually provide justification for being against marriage equality. This is the case even if we put their premises in the best possible light.

To show why, the first thing I’ll do is grant, just for the sake of argument, that gay sex is a sin. But the sinfulness of gay sex does not provide justification opposition to marriage equality. If gay sex was their only problem, then they would have to have no problem with a sexless same–sex marriage. After all, if both parties in a sexless same–sex marriage remained celibate, there would be no gay sex and therefore no sin. Since there’s no sin, no justification for opposition remains.

Analogous reasoning can be used for homosexuality. If we grant for the sake of argument that homosexuality is a sin, then they would have to have no problem with a same–sex marriage between straight people. In such a same–sex marriage, there’d bo no homosexuality, and therefore no sin.

But of course, it’s obvious that wingnuts’ opposition to same–sex marriage isn’t really about any deeply–held beliefs, or any real concern for the sanctity of marriage, but rather due to animosity towards LGBT people. And besides, coherence from fundies and wingnuts is as likely as snow falling on Tarawa.

So much for family values

The so–called “family values” of GOP presidential candidates are getting worse over time. This chart from Salon is instructive.

Nothing more to say, really.

Clark sworn in and by–election soon

Christy Clark has been sworn in as the new premier of British Columbia. She has already shuffled the cabinet to put her stamp on the government. As I have previously mentioned, she is the second woman, (after Rita Johnston), to be Premier. She ought to be a little bit to the left of Gordon Campbell, and in the short term I am willing to give her a chance to govern. It’s not like there’s a realistic chance of a motion of non–confidence passing. Some part of me would kind of want her to win the next election, as it would end British Columbia’s ridiculous “tradition” of putting women in charge of political parties in ruins.

Meanwhile, Gordon Campbell has resigned his seat of Vancouver–Point Grey. This means that there will be a by–election soon. Although Liberal–leaning, it is not exactly the safest Liberal seat in the legislature. If all the students at UBC actually bothered to vote in reasonable numbers, the seat might actually be considered competitive. Nevertheless, if Clark runs in the by–election she’ll be the favourite to win. That would be the first time since 1981 that the governing party of British Columbia has won a by–election.

How far we’ve yet to go

Today is the 100th International Women’s Day. To recognize this, it is important to realize how far women truly are from equality.  being about half the population, women make far less than half the income and own far less than half the property. Women are far more likely to be raped than men are. In some countries, women are still denied the vote. Patriarchal religions are used to infringe on the rights of women and to hold them back. Too many places infringe on women’s reproductive rights. The list can go on and on.

Feminism is more necessary than ever.

Music under the dense canopy of flowers

This is a good arrangement of the most famous duet in classical music. I really like it because it’s instrumental (and therefore non–sung, making it a billion times better than the sung version), because this number is one of my favourite pieces of classical music, and because I played the flute in school band.

If you cannot see the video, click here.

If you recognize the music, you’re in good company. “The Flower Duet”, also known as “Viens, Mallika” and “Sous le dôme épais“* has been used in gazillions of commercials to sell all sorts of different things.

And what’s with this number having all these titles, some of which look like French phrases?† Any what do I mean by being better because it is “non–sung”? To me, that raises an unsolvable issue with (some of the) classical music I like. I like lots of classical music, but I don’t like the singing that does with some parts of it. Basically, I don’t like the sound of the voices in that style of singing. In other words, I don’t like opera, cantatas, etc. The unsolvable problem is that several of my favourite pieces of classical music, happen to have singing in their “complete” versions. “The Flower Duet” comes from an opera and I like the music, so long as Lakmé and Mallika aren’t singing to it; I like playing the Queen of the Night’s vengeful call for murder on my flute, but not the Queen of the Night herself; “Sheep May Safely Graze” is Bach’s best work, so long as Pales isn’t singing in it; and so on. And sometimes it’s hard to find good–quality instrumental versions of such music, unless you play it yourself.

A good decision from SCOTUS

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that Westboro Baptist Church has the right to protest at funerals. Even though they are vile, hateful, really petty people, this is the correct decision. Popular speech doesn’t need protection; unpopular speech does.