Public Notice
By Mitch Berg
If I were asked to live-blog a gay wedding – for my customary live-blog fee of $1,000, and my requisite total editorial freedom – I am currently undecided as to whether or not I’d take the gig, on purely religious grounds.
Please feel free to proffer me a request to do so (backed with certified funds), so that I have to decide whether I want to be a test case, or to take your $1,000. Come to the table ready to sign the contract, and have your lawyers ready to go just in case.
Thanks.
April 3rd, 2015 at 10:28 am
I wonder if it is time for some east African immigrant outreach efforts by the Republican party.
April 3rd, 2015 at 10:56 am
Does that come with any other services Mitch? Social media, videography, MC the post ceremony festivities?
Do you have any religious objection to gay weddings, including those performed in churches that embrace them?
If you’re talking a Christianity based claim of religious belief, you should take into consideration that the Christian church — all branches and forms of it, protestant, Roman Catholic, Eastern Rite — were performing same sex marriages(in church, by clergy) into the 18th century, contrary to claims made by some conservatives.
http://anthropologist.livejournal.com/1314574.html
“Records of Christian same sex unions have been discovered in such diverse archives as those in the Vatican, in St. Petersburg, in Paris, in Istanbul and in the Sinai, covering a thousand-years from the 8th to the 18th century.
The Dominican missionary and Prior, Jacques Goar (1601-1653), includes such ceremonies in a printed collection of Greek Orthodox prayer books, “Euchologion Sive Rituale Graecorum Complectens Ritus Et Ordines Divinae Liturgiae” (Paris, 1667).
While homosexuality was technically illegal from late Roman times, homophobic writings didn’t appear in Western Europe until the late 14th century. Even then, church-consecrated same sex unions continued to take place.
At St. John Lateran in Rome (traditionally the Pope’s parish church) in 1578, as many as thirteen same-gender couples were joined during a high Mass and with the cooperation of the Vatican clergy, “taking communion together, using the same nuptial Scripture, after which they slept and ate together” according to a contemporary report. Another woman to woman union is recorded in Dalmatia in the 18th century.
Prof. Boswell’s academic study is so well researched and documented that it poses fundamental questions for both modern church leaders and heterosexual Christians about their own modern attitudes towards homosexuality.
For the Church to ignore the evidence in its own archives would be cowardly and deceptive. The evidence convincingly shows that what the modern church claims has always been its unchanging attitude towards homosexuality is, in fact, nothing of the sort.
It proves that for the last two millennia, in parish churches and cathedrals throughout Christendom, from Ireland to Istanbul and even in the heart of Rome itself, homosexual relationships were accepted as valid expressions of a God-given love and committment to another person, a love that could be celebrated, honored and blessed, through the Eucharist in the name of, and in the presence of, Jesus Christ.”
And if you’re not claiming Christianity for a religious reason for not doing this, it turns out that most other major religions have been performing or at least recognizing them as legitimate dating back to their origins as well. It’s documented all the way back into human ‘pre-history’ :
http://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2015/03/same-sex-marriage-pre-history
“If you have access via a library to the latest edition of the Journal of American History, I highly recommend Rachel Hope Cleves’ article on the prehistory of same-sex marriage. And if you can’t read it, she did a podcast you can listen to. She basically tracks down a long history of gay marriage, going back to berdaches among southwestern indigenous peoples through gold miners in 19th century California and to many cases throughout American history of people accepting marriage and marriage-like arrangements between same-sex couples.”
I suppose it really means your views on same sex marriage as a rock ribbed conservative depend on whether you want to side with the anti-democracy theocrats, who persist in believing things that are factually false (and not only on same sex marriage) or if you want to go with the less evangelical / more libertarian crowd that includes younger conservatives (the few that there are) that increasingly support same sex equality (not just marriage, but full equality to be free from discrimination in employment, housing, etc.).
http://www.dispatch.com/content/blogs/the-daily-briefing/2015/04/4-01-15-young-conservatives.html
Young Republicans push to support same-sex marriage
and
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/oped/bs-ed-conservative-case-20150329-story.html
The conservative case for same-sex marriage
I think it is beautiful karma in action that the right wing nut wedge issue is now a wedge largely limited to fracturing cohesion among conservatives. But the sweetest of all is watching the idolized Free Market steamroll the right wing bigots.
Watching the rabid right back peddling to placate business was sweet indeed.
I’ll be waiting to see which side of the divide you land on — if you ever tell us.
Hope your cold is better, and wishing you and your family, and the Mitch-keteers a joyous holiday weekend of choice.
April 3rd, 2015 at 11:45 am
I’ll be waiting to see which side of the divide you land on — if you ever tell us.
If I ever tell you?
I’ve written at great depth about this subject for years now.
I may respond to the rest of your exceedingly long and, per usual, incorrect comment later. Depends on whether there’s any evidence that you’ve stuck around for any back-and-forth, rather than your usual MO (drop a huge opinion-turd and scamper away without dealing with the inevitable rebuttal).
April 3rd, 2015 at 11:57 am
Needless to say, Dog Gone’s source relies on a dead link: http://www.colfaxrecord.com/detail/91429.html
Dog Gone’s goal is to legitimize whatever beliefs you hold that oppose her poorly thought out public policy positions. To do this, she types words into a search engine and links to the pseudo-random results.
April 3rd, 2015 at 12:07 pm
OK, so Doggone has some evidence that, contrary to Scripture, disobedient Christians participated in and even officiated at same sex mirages in the same way that other disobedient Christians sanctioned the slave trade. And this makes a difference to me….why?
Even apart from the tenuous nature of her “evidence”, it’s a complete “don’t care” for anyone who values the authority of Scripture.
April 3rd, 2015 at 12:09 pm
Did you know that all the devil worshippers in Medieval times were baptized Christians? It’s true!
April 3rd, 2015 at 12:12 pm
No society in the past 3,000 years has tried homosexual marriage. The left can try all they want to say otherwise. There were some ceremonies that were more of a brotherhood type thing. Some people have mistaken those for a same sex union.
Now, the Go Fund Me amt for the pizza place in Indiana is at……..let me hit refresh………$656,000. I see this as kind of like the Wisconsin recall primary. Gov’r Walker had no real opposition in it. One guy filled out the paper work as a joke candidate. But the Republican turnout was incredible. Huge lines. It was a way for Republicans to show support for the governor and to protest the loony left. That is what is going on with this fund.
Now it is at $659,000. It went up $3K in the time it took me to type this.
April 3rd, 2015 at 1:49 pm
If I were asked to live-blog a gay wedding – for my customary live-blog fee of $1,000, and my requisite total editorial freedom
I’ve live-blogged a MOB wedding; man, I should have had you negotiate a fee for me.
April 3rd, 2015 at 1:49 pm
Penigma’s Chihuahua drops by and leaves a steaming land mine of amazing size for a chihuahua.
There should be no entitlement to any personal service, unless the government has mandated that only a single source provider exist. If you can choose to do, or not do business with a provider, they should be able to choose to do, or not do business with you. For whatever freaking reason either of you want.
April 3rd, 2015 at 2:17 pm
I should have had you negotiate a fee for me.
It’s probably why you got the gig.
April 3rd, 2015 at 2:34 pm
Having Mitch live-blog the wedding ceremony wouldn’t be nearly as much fun as having him live-blog the DJ’s performace at the dance.
April 3rd, 2015 at 2:35 pm
same sex mirages
Not sure if that was intentional or an autocorrect, but that’s awesome.
April 3rd, 2015 at 3:13 pm
But Mark, you got to sit in the comfy chair! Isn’t that pay enough?
April 3rd, 2015 at 4:32 pm
Good point, Bubba. And I didn’t even have to contend with Cardinal Fang.
April 3rd, 2015 at 4:56 pm
Bill C: I stole it from Doug Wilson. I’m pretty sure he doesn’t mind if other people use it.
April 4th, 2015 at 12:45 am
And, Mr. D., you got to where a cool hat and address a global audience. Looks good on a resume.
April 4th, 2015 at 1:06 pm
What in the world of holy shit is Dog Gone blathering about? She copied and pasted a bunch of crap from a LiveJournal “Anthropologist Community” blog entry from 2009, that itself links to a dead article from the “Colfax Record,” and the actual article itself can only be found via “The Wayback Machine.” And then she links to another blog that trends, er, left, to put it mildly. And then she links to a “Columbus Dispatch” article that can’t be bothered to figure out the difference between “roll out” and “role out.” And THEN she links to an opinion piece in the “Baltimore Sun.”
Look, lady, I could post links to the first five search engine hits and copy and paste meandering text just as easily as you can. I just choose not to, because I’m not shit-assed insane.
April 4th, 2015 at 1:18 pm
Does this remind you of anyone?
From this week’s Goldberg File.
April 4th, 2015 at 3:21 pm
These homo Catholic weddings are the gin soaked delusions of perverts grasping for a history that never happened.
Once again, DG has been outed as a liar. It’s got to be getting old for her by now.
April 5th, 2015 at 9:44 am
It never ceases to amaze me that Liberals’ response to “That is wrong” boils down to “Jimmy did it, too.”
The correct response is “Maybe so, and if he did, then it was wrong when Jimmy did it, too. It’s still wrong. Stop doing it.”