Colorado GOP Senators: Jesus Is Not Down With Civil Unions

As the Grand Junction Sentinel’s Charles Ashby reports:

Allowing gays and lesbians to enter into civil unions is against God’s law, and lawmakers should reject it, some GOP senators said Thursday.

“My prayer as I stand here is for my words of truth to be spoken gracefully and heard with love,” Sen. Scott Renfroe, R-Greeley, told his fellow senators as they gave final approval to a civil unions law, sending it on to the Colorado House for the second year in a row.

“I truly believe Jesus is a better answer than Senate Bill 2,” [Pols emphasis] he said. “Adopting laws that change our definition of morality will tear the fabric of society. We’re trying to adopt laws that God’s law says is immoral.”

While some senators invoked religious reasons why gays and lesbians shouldn’t have similar rights of heterosexual couples, others said it shouldn’t be allowed because it would diminish traditional marriage between a man and a woman…

Ashby’s report captures some of the mood prior to yesterday’s final Senate passage of Senate Bill 12-002 to create civil unions in Colorado for gay and lesbian couples, but you’ve really got to watch the clips compiled above by Daniel Gonzales of Box Turtle Bulletin. It’s a heady brew of over-the-top religiosity that only Sens. Scott Renfroe and Kevin Lundberg can deliver.

On the upside, it does appear Renfroe got through this without comparing being gay to murder! As embarrassing as this trip to “Senate Well Sunday School” may be, it’s probably useful to remember the fact that it could have, and in fact has been, even worse.

24 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    Have to do with secular laws that we all have to follow? And if that’s the reasoning behind his vote, can that vote then be challenged in court as a violation of our constitutional right to free expression of our own religion?

    And to Senator Renfroe – what you stated is fundamentally un-American. Shame on you.

  2. Theosuphus Jones says:

    Second Regular Session

    Sixty-eighth General Assembly

    STATE OF COLORADO

    INTRODUCED

    LLS NO. 12-0527.01 Scott Renfroe

    SENATE BILL 12-666

    A BILL FOR AN ACT CONCERNING THE ABOLITION AND PROHIBITION OF THE ANTI-BIBLICAL ABOMINATION OF BLATANT IN-YOUR-FACE SHELLFISH EATING ESTABLISHMENTS  

    Bill Summary

    (Note: This summary applies to this bill as introduced and does

    not reflect any amendments that may be subsequently adopted. If this bill

    passes third reading in the house of introduction, a bill summary that

    applies to the reengrossed version of this bill will be available at

    http://www.leg.state.co.us/bil

    Whereas, the Lord Your God has declared that the eating of shellfish is an abomination in His eyes.  

    Whereas, the establishment known as ‘Red Lobster’ is a known SHELLFISH EATING ESTABLISHMENT, and even seems proud of this fact–flaunting it near schools, churches and even shopping malls, the most sacred of our institutions.

    Therefore be it hereby enacted–That all such SHELLFISH EATING ESTABLISHMENTS be promptly shuttered, and that such establishments turn over to the Colorado Senate’s Morality Division a list of all patrons known to have partaken in such orgies of sin as ‘Lobster Fest.’

    HOUSE SPONSORSHIP

    DelGrosso,

    SENATE SPONSORSHIP

  3. Early Worm says:

    I am a Christian. To have these alleged Christians use my faith as a justification for their bigotry make me sick. These idiots are the first to claim the primacy of the Constitution. But, when it is clear that the principals championed by that document; freedom, equality, justice, conflict with their bigotry, fear and hatred, they invoke “the word of God.” “God commands and demands that we deny rights to those that are different.”  

    • ArapaGOP says:

      God demands only that we follow his laws. Be careful about questioning another man’s faith, lest someday yours be questioned.

      • Theosuphus Jones says:

        but that appears to be a blended fabric shirt you have on there.

        But a question?  When I conquer a village, and can then–by God’s law–take possession of all the women and children..at what age can I force one to marry me?  

         

      • Aristotle says:

        Just the hypocrites.

        So tell me: Your quote sounds like you support keeping religious reasoning out of lawmaking. Is that accurate?

      • raymond1 says:

        Renfroe’s sure does. Renfroe’s god is kind of an asshole, actually. Which is to say that Renfroe’s fantasy of a god validating his homophobia as righteous is a sick delusion.

      • Early Worm says:

        “God demands only that we follow his laws.” Which laws are those:  Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; Let him who is without sin cast the first stone; Do not judge lest you be judged; Don’t eat pork or seafood, and do not mix fabrics; Pray five times a day; abstain from food drink and sex between dawn and dusk during Ramadan. Societies laws are what we are talking about, not God’s laws.  When you mix the two, that is where we start to have problems.

        “Be careful about questioning another man’s faith, lest someday yours be questioned.” I question no man’s faith. I am sure that these bigots truly believe God supports their hatred. I feel strongly that they are wrong, and am compelled to speak out against their hate. Rest assured, if they were Muslims attempting to legislate for the application of their interpretation of “God’s law” in the form of sharia law, I would be equally upset.

      • OldAuroraDem says:

        “Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and unto God the things that are God’s.” I don’t recall seeing anything about healthcare, making end of life medical decisions, or civil unions in the bible. They are called civil unions because they derive from civil law — not God’s law — which again, does not address them. I think that we are in “Caesar’s” realm here, and Jesus tells us to abide by “Caesar’s” law in such circumstances.

      • MADCO says:

        They just can’t get married to other gay people?

        The Red Lobster Prohibition Act of 2012 is just the start.

        Anyone wearing cotton/poly or any other fabric blend, shall be executed. (Deuteronomy or Leviticus – I forget. I know it was the Old Testament not Jesus, but I just don’t recall which crazy part.)

        Selling your daughter into slavery will be ok again.  (Exodous 21)

        Because  touching the skin of a dead pig makes one “unclean” it shall be outlawed.  (Leviticus 11)  Tim Tebow – out – filthy animal.

        Farmers planting alternating rows of cotton and polyester – executed. (Old Testament somewhere)

        People working on the Sabbath shall be executed. (Exodous 35:2) – Tebow really out this time.

        I could go on- but you get the point.  Why all the hate in the name of Jesus?

      • Be careful about questioning another man’s (or woman’s) faith, especially when in a legislature specifically created with a separation from faith in mind.

      • dukeco1 says:

        a Christian, but I don’t think you are. Not judging by the things you say here on a daily basis.

        You DO remember, don’t you, that JC changed a few things from the “old” ways?

        The republican party, as they currently operate, are little better than the Pharisees Jesus encountered. Your greed and ambition have moved you light years away from the teachings of Christ.

        And as far as the “Old” Testament is concerned…you can put that somewhere the sun doesn’t shine.

        When you, and your party, start following the teachings of Christ, instead of worshipping the Almighty Dollar, you might actually get a clue.

        From Matthew, 6:24…

        Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

        Matthew 7:15…

        Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheeps’ clothing, but inwardly, they are ravening wolves.

        Todays’ GOP is one of the least “Christian” organizations on the planet.

        • rocco says:

          We’re dealing with the results of the old carnival huckster’s merging of republicans and “evangelicals”, that he hatched for the Reagan run in’80.

          We see them as they are…..the lizards from the old cult campy TV mini-series  “V”.

          They don’t realize what they are. Millions of today’s evangelicals weren’t even born when Falwell welded the moral majority/Anita Bryant cult/republican party together and delivered the christian conservative movement to Reagan.

          That demographic simply doesn’t know anything different than the the way it is now in their “christian faith”.

          Based on the Calvinist Baptist bastardization of Christianity, today’s non profit and tax exempt but very for profit in reality christian endeavor is an absolute power, influence, and cash machine. A machine that devours everything in its’ path. Mean spirited, nasty, anti gay rights, anti women’s’ rights, politics of the wealthy, for the wealthy and by the wealthy white christian conservative.

          Jesus has nothing to do with this movement.

          Even the catholics have moved significantly toward this calvinist path, as evidenced by their non relenting support of republicans.

          Full disclusure, the bishops did zing Ryan last week.

          Too little, too late.

          Somebody like agop is seemingly old enough to know better. He seems part of the older white republican 60’s draft dodging chicken hawk generation, like Ted Nugent. But that segment of republicanism is entitled, a mostly pro southern strategy, anti gay, racially prejudiced demographic that sees a black President as “different”. So they dovetail into today’s conservative cult. Comfortably, to say the least.

          libertad is too young to know anything about how “christians” viewed religions’ and politics’ role pre Falwell. With no historical back ground, he lives in the moment. To him, history doesn’t go back any further than “Saddam hitting us on 9/11″ and fox and friends”.

          So, from their perspective, what we see as vile, their religious viewpoint is simply advantageous….to them.

          In the end, all we have to know is how to beat them in November.

             

  4. BlueCat says:

    “secular” a dirty word.  Fact is, our constitution absolutely requires secular government, government that concerns itself only with secular issues and doesn’t meddle, one way or the other, in the religious lives of citizens.

    Just once I’d like some presidential candidate to respond to a question about his or her religious beliefs with “How is that at all relevant” because that is the correct answer. The job will not require taking any religious stands or endorsing any religion. It’s Commander in Chief, not national High Priest.

    The same goes for reasons for or against any legislation.  We aren’t supposed to be in the business of legislating for all Americans according to the personal religious beliefs of some. Renfroe will be free not to marry or enter into a civil union with a man whether other men are allowed to or not, so his personal beliefs are not in any danger of being violated.

    Jews who keep kosher don’t have the right or need to outlaw pork for everyone. How is this different?  

    Secular doesn’t mean “Godless” or” anti-religious”. It’s simply a perfectly neutral term for matters outside the realm of religion which are the only matters with which our government has any business concerning itself in the first place.

    The proper response to Renfroe is exactly what Dave said.

  5. davebarnes says:

    people who quote their imaginary friends make laws?

    What is the difference between Renfroe and one of those wackos on the 16th Street Mall?

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.