Tom Hanks questions Prop. 8 supporters’ patriotism
We were considered fascists for questioning theirs, but it’s patriotic for them to question ours.
Per Hot Air headlines, Hollywood lib Tom Hanks tars Prop. 8 supporters as “un-American.” As opposed to all of those patriots gathering black lists and compiling maps of people who exercised their right to vote and dared to express political opinions in opposition to Tinseltown orthodoxy…
Tom Hanks, Executive Producer for HBO’s controversial polygamist series “Big Love,” made his feelings toward the Mormon Church’s involvement in California’s Prop 8 (which prohibits gay marriage) very clear at the show’s premiere party on Wednesday night.
“The truth is this takes place in Utah, the truth is these people are some bizarre offshoot of the Mormon Church, and the truth is a lot of Mormons gave a lot of money to the church to make Prop-8 happen,” he told Tarts. “There are a lot of people who feel that is un-American and I am one of them. I do not like to see any discrimination codified on any piece of paper, any of the 50 states in America, but here’s what happens now. A little bit of light can be shed and people can see who’s responsible and that can motivate the next go around of our self correcting constitution and hopefully we can move forward instead of backwards. So lets have faith in not only the American, but Californian constitutional process.”
(link)
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- In Which I Question The Relevance of « fretless fascinations
- The Jawa Report
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Tom Hanks: Prop 8 supporters are “un-American”
- More Proof Tom Hanks is an Idiot | Mark's Soap Box
- Elephant Owners » Blog Archive » Hanks, we have a problem
- Memo to Tom Hanks: Kiss My All American Conservative ASS! | Political Byline
- Rhymes With Right
- Sheer Lunacy; What Has Happened? « Northern Thoughts And Reflections
- ButAsForMe! » Tom Hanks questions Prop. 8 supporters’ patriotism
- Radio Vice Online
- Hollywood cowards attack mormons but ignore African Americans when raging against Prop 8 « A Conservative Metal-Head in a Pop Music World
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Proposition 8
Power Line
» More From the East Anglia Archives
Doug Ross @ Journal
» ACORN pwnage part II: Breitbart's BigGovt Lowers the BoomBig Government
» BREAKING: San Diego ACORN Document Dump ScandalVillainous Company
» Amateur Hour in the Oval Office Continues....Nice Deb
» OGreen Room
» Times Slimes Obamic ClimesLegal Insurrection
» Nation Mag Outs Secret U.S. Anti-Terror Program
Which begs the question, those of you who are atheists, on what do you base your moral code? On a side note, if free will is nonexistent, how do you explain someone changing their mind?
It is interesting that you picked that particular quote from Bill Provine. I used that exact quote in a sermon a couple of weeks ago to make a point.
Let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that we agree evolution is true, that all living things evolved from a single celled organism over billions of years, and that this process can be completely explained through natural forces. Even if this is all true (a big if), none of Provine’s conclusions would follow.
Evolution isn’t a big deal. The only real impact evolution would have on Christianity (if it turns out to be true) is that it would affect how we could/should interpret a few chapters in Genesis. That is all.
I don’t understand why don’t see what evolution is. its an atheistic faith, masquerading as ’science’.
what provine said is true. if evolution is true, christianity is false…plain and simple.
no god created us, we don’t need a savior, there is no right and wrong.
what do you think this is all about??? ’science’ think again…
right4life:
Behe is a sellout because that is exactly what he has done. Peddle his nonsense for money.
As I said, I am through playing your idiotic games. Your questions have been answered time and time again. Are you seriously suggesting that “god” created the Cambrian critters, then decided he didn’t like them, then made fish, then later (countless years later) dinosaurs, then mammals, and so on?
Or are you suggesting dinosaurs and humans lived together (as some creationists do)?
What exactly are you suggesting?
Does it ever occur to you that Einstein’s theories of Relativity break down at the quantum level? Do you understand that theories are always being further refined?
MtsEdge:
I have had a similar exchange with you in the past (which you seem to have forgotten) and frankly (though I realize you might not be aware of this) your comments are somewhat insulting.
Atheists DON’T HATE GOD. In fact many of us WISH it were true or WISH we could believe, we simply can’t, in our minds it is illogical. Doesn’t this make sense to you? I have explained this again and again on this blog.
Are you actually suggesting that Greek philosophers HATED “god” because they were polytheists? That doesn’t make any sense at all! Which “god” or “gods” did they hate? Their own? A monotheist “god” which they had no awareness of?
As for a moral code, it’s simply based on evolved empathy, a complex topic in itself. (I suggest reading Kant’s categorical imperative or Dawkin’s Moral Zeitgeist, my favorites)
Honestly though, you have to ask yourself, “why does it have to be based on anything?” If you seriously didn’t think god exists are you telling me you would do bad things? Is “god” the only thing stopping you from evil? If that is the case, you don’t sound like a very nice person. I am a moral person simply because it is the right thing to do.
As for the “question” of free will; it’s merely a moot point, and the reasons should be obvious. Whether or not predestination is true, it appears to us that we have free will. So the question really is just something for philosophers to muse on. It really is kind of a meaningless question.
Trollman:
We have disagreed often in the past, but I am glad you are one the sensible side of the fence here. MtsEdge, please take note of Trollman here, he understands that evolution no more a religious or moral statement than the Theory of Gravity is.
and dawkins is a HERO of the faith!!
right…
no they just magically appeared through ‘evolution’ by some magic mechanism…but we *KNOW* they evolved, because evolution HAS TO BE TRUE!!!
and you are your own little god…deciding what is good, and what is evil….
right4life:
Enough sarcasm. Put up or shut up.
What is your theory?
Give us a rough timeline when “god” created what creatures and your idea of how they “appeared.”
when you cannot even tell me the mechanism for evolution?
laughable again.
why cast pearls before swine? look it up for yourself.
you don’t even know your own theory, and you want me to explain creationism, and its various views to you??
oh please
do you understand the neutralist/selectionist debate in evolution…how about punctuated equilibrium?
you don’t understand your own theory, obviously. do you want me to explain it to you??
right4life said:
Provine is going way beyond his area of expertise here, when he draws those bogus conclusions.
My birth
Take me, as an example. There is nothing miraculous or special about my birth. I was born to a fertile, mature heterosexual couple. I wasn’t even the first born. My parents were well within childbearing years when I was conceived.
Furthermore, we know a great deal about how a mature male and female human create a new person, how the sperm & egg combine, create a single-celled organism, how that develops into a fully developed person, and so on.
The same exact natural process happens however many times each day, all over the world, and has for however long. So we can safely conclude that there is absolutely nothing miraculous about how I came into existence.
What does that say about me?
Now, does all that mean I am not a creation of God? Does that mean I am less of a child of God than those that were created/conceived through a divine miracle, such as Isaac, Samuel, John the Baptist, or Adam? Not at all!
Even though I wasn’t created by a divine miracle, I was created through divine providence. Where did the universe come from? Where did those natural forces come from? Where did the laws of physics and chemistry come from? They were created and established by God. God, in His infinite wisdom & foreknowledge, knew me before I was created through natural forces. Using nature (which He Himself created), He placed me in the time and place of His choosing (Acts 17:26-28), even though I wasn’t born through a miracle.
How God usually works
In fact, while the Bible records that God sometimes interacts with His creation through miracles, most of the time He interacts through divine providence. Babylon conquered Judah, not through miracle, but through normal means. Nebuchadnezzar probably had no idea he was being “used” by the God of the Jews, but he was, nevertheless.
Just because the atheist historian might not think God had anything to do with the fall of Judah – in fact, he might falsely conclude that the fall of Judah disproved the God of the Jews – that doesn’t do anything to disprove that God was in fact behind the conquest of Judah.
Why Provine is wrong
Provine falsely concludes that a God who works in this manner leads to deism, which is effectively atheism. But the Bible teaches that God usually works through providence, not explicit miracles. If I pray to God and ask for something, and it comes to pass (though not through an obvious miracle), does that mean I shouldn’t thank God for answering my prayer? Just because God isn’t always obvious, that doesn’t mean He isn’t there. Nor does that entail deism, for the only reason why the universe continues to exist is because God continues to will it to be so.
please, provine speaks for evolution, in a way that you do not.
how about miller, believe him a textbook??
its plain and simple, evolution means no god, no need for a savior…this is what the professional evolutionists themselves say. why don’t you believe them??
look where this is from….
Mayr is the man who came up with the neo-darwinian synthesis…what we know as evolution today..
HE SPEAKS for evolution..in a way that few others, other than darwin, ever did….
right4life:
Where? Which version? Every different religion has a different story, to include different branches of Christianity. On top of that ID is it’s own animal.
Which one are we talking about?
right4life said:
Dr. Provine is an authority on the history of biology, but he is not an authority in philosophy or theology. The quote we are discussing aren’t points of scientific history, but philosophical/theological conclusions based upon science. I am pretty confident I have more background in philosophy, logic, & theology than Dr. Provine. He is out of his element here, and it shows by his easily refutable conclusions.
right4life said:
I don’t follow the logic. Is it impossible for God to use evolution? God can create the universe in 6 days, but somehow it would be impossible for Him to do so over billions of years? That doesn’t make sense.
right4life said:
That is what some evolutionists say, not all. I don’t believe them because I have investigated matters for myself and have reached a different conclusion. Evolutionists aren’t infallible.
Dr. Miller, an “evolutionist,” does believe in both evolution and God – he is Catholic. In fact, he wrote a book describing how evolution and God are compatible and even complimentary.
Nothing you wrote even addressed my points in my last post. In my post, I explained in length why their philosophical conclusions are false.
so you’re a leading evolutionist??? please, you’re published, and recognized around the world as an authority on evolution??
please.
obviously you do not. its rather simple, if we evolved by random processes, then no god created us, and we don’t need a savior…how hard is this??
then you have your own theory of evolution…some form of theistic evolution..which is NOT evolution. sorry. its not taught in schools, and dawkins, et al, would not buy it any more than I would.
Sigh. Hey, I tried.
you need to try to convince dawkins et al, about YOUR theory of evolution…good luck.
trollman, do you believe the following is true?
right4life, I’d be happy to answer your question. But why should I continue to answer your points when you refuse to acknowledge mine? You still have not pointed out any errors in my reasoning in post #502. If you are going to reject it, then point out the error, quote the precise location of my error, and explain why it is faulty.
I did, you think evolution is ‘theistic’ evolution…its not..you have your own theory of evolution, and its not what is taught in schools or believed by professional evolutionists.
you put God into the mix, evolution rules Him out explicitly.
right4life, stop asking liberals about mechanisms. You know that it’s considered an unfair tactic.
Don’t ruin wonderful liberal theories by asking them to explain the mechanisms.
very true!!
it just works, somehow, like Obama’s economics!!!
On January 16th, 2009 at 3:06 pm, Mookie said:
You don’t see adulterers forming a coalition and demanding the public accept their sinful lifestyle and bestow upon it the same rights as a morally acceptable lifestyle.
No, they just become conservative icons, like Newt, Rush, etc.
—————————————
You forgot Clinton.
I wonder why?
Because Mookie was talking about conservatives and last I checked Bill Clinton was not one of those?
You would do best to actually deal with the content of the arguments with which you disagree, rather than trying to show some egregious, crippling bias or what not. The way conservatives constantly react like you do (in desperation to avoid the actual discussion and bring the conversation down to the moronic level social conservatives are more comfortable with) makes jarringly obvious how unforgivable awful your arguments are.
Even before the theory of evolution, believing in a god was absolutely irrational. Just because you can’t explain something at this point in time, you’re going to abandon scientific progress and just say it must be the result of some deity? Such an attitude is grossly juvenile.
However, among Christians, a belief in evolution does not expressly negate any belief in god. As I already point out, the Catholic Church accepts evolution without compromise. They choose instead to view it as being the product of God or whatever. But they accept it, understanding that science is science and pretending it’s not there (just as evangelical Americans do) is ludicrous. The Catholic Church is the largest Christian church in the world; has over 1 billion followers. 1 in every 6 people is a Catholic. Are you going to tell me they are worshipping Darwin in lieu of Jesus? I passionately dislike the Catholic Church. Passionately. But at least they accept facts for what they are.
professing to be wise, they have become fools….
you confirm the truth of the bible, with every post.
do you even know the mechanism for evolution there omu? or do you just take it on FAITH???
oh well never get between a fool and the fire…
Zero, no insult was intended. I do recall having a similar conversation with you before and this is where it pretty much ended last time.
I was trying to ask what you expect from others in terms of behavior and what you offer in return. If, for example, you think murder is wrong, why?? If life has no intrinsic meaning, then what should it matter if a person murders another person? By the same token, how can you expect to have your person and property respected by others if you are found to have no value by others?
It does intrigue me to think that you do not feel awe or obligation to God to seek His truth, and so perhaps these questions are more of a rhetorical nature.
I’m sorry you were insulted, truly I didn’t mean to offend you.
MtsEdge:
I don’t know if you are still reading but I’ll give it a shot once again:
I guess I would have to say to you, why do you need “god” to have “meaning” or “value” in life?
I feel empathy for other people. It is a naturally evolved trait that you can see in other animals as well (monkey for example). Why does it have to have “meaning” or “god?” I feel empathy and expect the same in return. It really is that simple.
As I said earlier, if you thought there was no god would that mean its OK to kill your neighbor? Of course not!
It is somewhat intriguing to me that you worship a “god” whom has (if you believe the Bible to be true) done absolutely horrible things in the distant past. How can you draw your morality from someone who supposedly killed every first born of Egypt? Doesn’t that sound monstrous and unforgivable?
Honestly, I wasn’t so insulted. It’s just very frustrating me to have this same exact conversation over and over again. Does it truly not occur to you that you don’t need “god” to tell you what is right and wrong? For that matter, how would “he” tell you anyway?
Again, I must insist that you read Kant (just one of many).
Godlessness isn’t a virtue.