Straightening out heretics (SOURCE)
(OKLAHOMA CITY) If the obvious is obvious, then why skirt around the obvious word? Isn't it obvious gays and lesbians are the obvious targets?
Let me explain.
GOPer Rep. Jason Nelson gets a bit squirrelly in his use of the word "shell" in reference to his bill to arrest clergy who perform religious ceremonies he doesn't like. He's obviously not at all embarrassed that his plan has been discovered, yet if a shell bill is merely a formality as he says, why does he select clergy performing ceremonies in the context of their constitutionally protected religious practices? And why does he single out marriage? Why didn't he choose baptism, or divorce, or circumcision?
And here's another POV of Nelson's obvious gay-hating bill from beyond Okie-land borders.
http://www.queerty.com/why-is-ok-rep-jason-nelson-changing-just-1-word-of-a-law-banning-priests-from-officiating-gay-marriages-20100127/ or http://tinyurl.com/ydbm8wq
See! I'm not infected with the Tenther-Birther-Tea-Bag virus.
It's obvious GOPer Rep. Nelson isn't satisfied that in Oklahoma there's an immoral and illegal constitutional amendment imposed by the voters in 2004 preventing recognition by the state of same-gender marriages, part of my civil rights.
Having done everything obviously to sequester gay and lesbian couples in the public forum, Nelson now wants to go after clergy performing ceremonies that have no legal recognition outside the walls of their sanctuaries. This obvious desire runs smack against the First Amendment guarantee of freedom of, and freedom from, religion.
Why do religious fundies in Oklahoma not understand that they've killed the golden goose of their gay hatred by passing restrictive laws and amendments against gay and lesbian taxpayers. The only obvious thing to do next is to restrict our movements within the state, segregating us to gay ghettos as the Nazis did to the Jews of Germany.