'Prop 8: The Musical'

Ignoring the outrageous misinterpretations of biblical doctrine, at least this video doesn't encourage criminal vandalism or personal threats. And it doesn't single out any particular group as the "evildoers." More people who disagreed with the passage of Prop 8 ought to find ways to express their disappointment in ways like this, rather than seeking revenge in a harmful way that epitomizes the very hate they preach against. A little parody? Sure. This doesn't bother me. Defacement of property and the interruption of life? Unconstitutional and morally wrong.

Fabulous!

"Unconstitutional and morally wrong."

So is making me less than a citizen by denying me equal treatment under the law.

I agree that the lengths my community has gone to in voicing our displeasure do seem excessive. But you see how rational and even-tempered you feel when you have rights that had been yours get stripped away by the religious right's hate campaign.

I agree with JJ that this is a better way in which to voice your displeasure with the democratic process. It's so funny how they misinterpret Bible Scripture to fit their agenda, shame on them. I also think you need to stop criticising the christians that this is their agenda, take a look at Obama for he is against Gay Marriage as are many democrats and non christians. Quit targeting one group of people, it's bigger than this. Americans in 30 states don't agree with re-defining Marriage, it's already been defined. It's a bit above your pay grade to think you can change the definition for the rest of us. Get over it and lets move onto giving civil unions all the rights and benefits that a marriage provides.

I think "outrageous misinterpretations of biblical doctrine" is one of the things that the gay marriage advocates are complaining about in the first place. When the book of Leviticus recommends execution for both sodomy and eating shrimp, and people still manage to quote it with a straight face, it kind of begs to be mocked. Congratulations to everyone involved in this. Pointing out hypocrisy is so much more fun with jazz hands!

Perhaps the people who were pushed to demonstrate wouldn't have done so if their constitutional rights hadn't been snatched away from them. Discrimination is unconstitutional and morally wrong!

Uhm... JJ, what exactly do you think are the outrageous misinterpretations of biblical doctrine? Because, that's pretty spot on to me. These things are clearly written down, and you cannot pick and choose which to enforce. That's ridiculous.

JJ – out of thousands and thousands who have protested the passing a Prop 8, very few have vandalized or given personal threats. With that many people PEACEFULLY protesting, odds are you're going to have a few nut balls.

As for singling out a particular group – I'm actively involved in the fight for marriage equality, and I can knowledgeably say that the focus is on many groups, and we're doing peaceful outreach to them, showing our side. If in particular you're talking about the Mormons, they actively involved themselves in a political situation by giving over $20 million to Prop 8. I think by doing this, they opened the door to a political response, and naturally, some of those responses are going to be angry. If they don't like that, they should've thought about that before involving themselves. (And they should've thought about their long history of racism and homophobia, too)

Great great great. Yes- the Bible says a lot of things and the selective picking and choosing – to honor or ignore various verses that suit or push various organizations views and religious groups is just plain ridiculous. How do you defend one verse and not all?? Not to mention: SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE!!
SING OUT LOUD!

loves it!!!!

I agree with JJ.

It was funny, despite all the inaccuracies that people use as actual argument.s

'Outrageous misinterpretations of biblical doctrine'? By that, of course, you are referring to passages which call homosexuality an abomination? In any case, Prop 8 itself IS an interruption of life. It's a limit on a civil right that all American's should have, to be legally married.
This video should seem a little bit silly, because the whole issue is silly. There isn't an issue. Not allowing civil marriage due to sexual orientation is exactly the same level as not allowing a black man and a white woman to be seen together in public, for having 'separate but equal' education for children of different races, or trying to keep the right to vote limited to only white males. Any of those sound unreasonable? As recent as 40 years ago some of these were a reality. THOSE were morally wrong. We need to move forward as a people, not stagnate in hate and ignorance.

So awesome!! I love Jack Black just a little bit more now (not that I didn't love him before) that he's played Jesus.

It was great and made its point.

Bravo to Shaiman!

Time to overturn Prop 8.

Funny, true, but funny. Church and state should be separate across the board.

I live in SF, I am blessed to have lots of gay, lesbian, trans-gender what ever people who I either love, hate, or don't care. To me they are people with different views that I have no issue with. They are what they are, another part of the human race. Anyway I think this would be fantastic and love to audtion!

This video is great! I wish it had shown 2 weeks prior to the election. I agree that protests against folks that donated money is a good thing though, not through violence, but show how many people care, and we also vote with our $$.
If people want to quote the bible to show that homosexuality is wrong, fine, but they should also be boycotting Red Lobster, not allowing their wives and daughters outside the home during "that time of the month" and the rest of the things that are in Leviticus. People that have no idea what that means, really need to read that book of the bible, and wonder, why religions pick and choose from it.
I say this as a 10 year veteran from the US Army, wounded in second tour in iraq. I defend your right to believe what you wish, but not to try to limit equal rights *not special rights*.

So it turns out, JJ, that the "misinterpretation" of the specific Leviticus passage was mistranslated. It has been changed and warped from the original Tyndale translation to reflect badly on homosexuality by nearly every translation that came after the original. Please look this up.

I hope Jack Black kills, though.

I'm bi-curious. And even that's okay. Because if I'm bi-curious, and I'm somehow made from God, then I guess God must be a little bi-curious himself!

AMAZING! So well performed and written. It's executed in a comedic manner, yet it is so true.

PLEASE post a link to this on the CNN Politics page! More people need to see this!

If our aim if to preserve marriage as it was defined in the bible, eliminating divorce should be a much higher priority than eliminating same sex marriage. However, it is more convenient to discriminate than to look at ourselves in the mirror.

I agree with Mary, and with the fact that some biblical misunderstanding has happened. The Bible is meant to be read as a story, not a collection of phrases that could be pulled out of fortune cookies. In the context of the entire story, a reader would see that Jesus declared shellfish "clean"–among other things. When taken out of context, a reader could say that Paul wanted all men to cut off their genitals (Galatians 5:11-12). Context is key to biblical interpretation. What I see to be the problem is that the religious right has "ranked" sin. If someone else's sin ranks "higher" than theirs, then they get up in arms about it–while ignoring their tendency to be greedy or judgmental or arrogant.

the bible states, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination." (Lev 18:22, KJB)
Now, this already brings of many many questions as well as the obvious problems with context and translations.
1. Does this mean that lesbians are in the clear? because they would not be lying with males at all...
2. Does this mean that the person doing the lying is an abomination? or just that the act is an abomination?
3. Does this mean that having sex with a woman as you would a man is also an abomination?

finally, one that bugged me through 12 years of catholic school,
If Jesus is the "New Covenant", thus negating all covenants before him (the whole sacrificing and such), why would you follow what Leviticus (an Old Testament book) says? Did Jesus not make literally following the Old Testament a wee bit obsolete?

And Gecko, let's take away a fundamental right from you (like maybe the one about free speech or bearing arms) and let's see how quickly you "get over it".

I have one word for all you pro-8ers: PROHIBITION

A majority a Americans voted for it, but, really, how long did it take for them to realize what it actually meant? Oh yeah, 13 years...

And now we can happily and freely drink alcoholic beverages – I suggest everyone go out and enjoy our freedom to enjoy alcohol and have a drink to the 22nd ammendment and to the freedom to marry who you want to marry

Regan,

"the bible states, “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Lev 18:22, KJB)
Now, this already brings of many many questions as well as the obvious problems with context and translations."

how about these interpretations:
4. Being an exclusively gay man, I've never actually layed with "womankind," so I'm in the clear? I've not layed with mankind as with womankind...

5. The Bible was not written to speak to women. Who's to say that it is written to gay men. These seem to be rules for straight men. It *would* be wrong for a straight man to have sex with another man if it isn't his orientation. So, the interpretation would be that it's wrong to have sex with someone outside of your orientation... a straight woman to have sex with another woman; a lesbian to have sex with a man; a gay man to have sex with a woman; a straight man to have sex with a man. (Leaves bisexual, transgender, transsexual and dual gender people in uncertainty).

6. what if it's really talking about the practice of men taking young boys (and essentially raping them) as a substitute for their wives? Wasn't this widely practiced before the Bible was written? Isn't this portion of the bible when people were trying to enact and enforce laws and rules?

Should be fun to put a light on the real issue of same sex marriage and how it has no impact on the sacanity of marrage. Hope it exposes the big lies regelion and self rightious idiots view Prop 8. Prop 8 is about legalizing discrimination.

For the people who want to quote Leviticus & use that as an excuse along with shrimp. News Flash people it is in the New Testament as well Romans chapter 1. Also it speaks on other sins as well so son't feel excluded, you are included. When Jesus died on the cross for us that is what stopped us from being stoned & having to give animal sacrifice. It pays to read & stop using the bible to defend your perversion by picking verses out the bible like eating shrimp etc to say it is okay to do what you do. If you don't believe in Chrisitanity why does it bother you? You acts as if you are being held in prison. & stop comparing your "lifetsyle of choice" TO the black civil rights movement it is different. Alll this lawsuits outbreaking are starting to backfire. Pretty soon the will be a federal ban, because of this in your face attitude.

I love it, but I wish it would have come out a week before the election...

This little diddy hit the nail on the head! Prop 8 is now back in the CA Supreme Court and is expected to be declared unconstitutional some next spring. Meanwhile, the CA Gov was VERY upset when Prop 8 passed in Nov. Now he's got a budget shortfall due to an $11 mil per year loss in sales tax revenue from gay weddings.

The main point is, Jesus, the Bible and your Church has nothing to do with any civil law – Separation of Church and State. You don't need a church or a bible to get married, but you sure do need a court and a license.

So if you want to take your court issued license to your church and have your union santified by your priest or minister, go ahead. Just don't try to force your Bible, and Church on everyone else.

A Marriage is between three entities – the state being the third.
Frankly I think marriages and divorces should neither be sanctioned nor opposed by the state. Being married should have no impact on one's taxes. Marriage is a religious act and is supposed to be between the couple and their God. There is no reason, other than tradition, that it should be anything else.

I love the clowns who say "get over it", as if this is something that people are just going to forget about. Human and civil rights were taken from gay couples. Now the gay-haters (and that's what you are, no matter what you tell yourselves) are whining and complaining that people who have had their rights stripped away from them are standing up to protest. "The gays are supposed to be tolerant!" they shout, followed by "if they're so tolerant, why won't they tolerate our intolerance?" Really, the hypocrisy is ridiculous.

The haters should have to deal with the consequences for trying to oppress the civil rights of a whole section of the citizenry. If it is a bit uncomfortable now, tough. They should think about how uncomfortable they made the gay community and its supporters when they decided to legislate inequality and hate into the state constitution.

Besides, if this bothers them so much, why not just pen a new constitutional amendment to banish public protest? That's how we get rid of things we don't like, right?

All these religious right supporters always involve the scriptures about why same sex marriage is wrong and should be banned. But how come our politicians never use the scriptures? They just say that same sex marriage is wrong. They do not use the scriptures because they know that if they do, they will be defying the seperation of church and state; and that is against the law. I put forth this question to the religous right and all those who oppose same sex marriage: If we are a country with seperation of churchc and state, putting all scriptures and religion aside, why is same sex marriage wrong? Why do you oppose it? And please, if you are going to answer this question, put all your religious views aside.

When you speak of your "consitutional rights being snatched away", you do realize that you only had that "constitutional right" for a few months, right? I'd say the rest of us had our constitutional rights taken away by the illegal actions the liberal California Supreme Court took when they allowed gays to marry in the first place. How do we constantly let the minority in this country dictate to the majority how to live our lives? The people finally bit back and righted this wrong by passing Prop 8.

Why can't somebody come up with a term that would define gay unions (but a gay word for marriage). I think people would be fine if you said "I'm married" would mean you are hetero wheras if you said "I'm (fill in the new term) would mean you are gay. That seems like it would be a good solution. I have really mixed feelings about prop 8- but it does seem like the gays are harassing mormans way too much for this passing. That seems wrong to me. They can think what they want AND donate money to what they want. The same for the gays and anyone else! I am losing sympathy because of all of the whining and harassment of another minority group-albeit a religous one. So what if some donated money? So you are saying that just because members of a really small church donated t$ that they should take the blame for the 52% that voted for it? Lay off other minorites if you want me to support yours. Show more positive things why we should all be on your side.

There seems to be some confusion.....

Obama had said he believed that marriage was between a man and a woman.

BUT. He also said he did NOT support amendments that would change the constitution to prohibit gay marriage.

So he would have voted against Prop 8.

I think the musical was wonderful, and helps spread awareness about this important issue.

My 11 year old son turned to me after watching this and said "So, Jack Black is watching over us?"

He gets it!

Thank you for sharing this. I think it is wonderful!

After thousands of years...humans are different now? Somehow right and wrong don't apply to us? We have moved beyond the requirement for self control and decency?

America's new moral standard is "No moral standards"? I don't see how a society without moral standards and direction is going to survive. Historically as human societies become amoral they collapse. We are still human...and still need to support the best and most constructive behaviors to maintain our society...and our future, which is our children.

Marriage between a man and a woman is historically and religiously the most fundamental bond in our society. It is still the most fundamental bond in our society. The muslims know it, the chistians know it, the buddists know it, the hindus know it...and the liberal gays know it but don't care about anything but their desire to thrust their perversions onto society.

It cracks me up to hear all the people scrambling to justify their positions on issues that seem, to me, to be none of their business. After watching the clip, reading people's comments and 30 years of personally dealing with this issue, I have a few thoughts.

1) it may be a choice for some to behave a certain way, but that's not the case for me. I am who I am. End of story.
2) I have the same God-given rights as anyone else. I also must respect your rights to live your own life based on hate and fear. It hurts you most, not me. Trust me when I say that noone hated me more than me but I grew up.
3) There are certain things that it will NEVER be possible to truly regulated by the government and any attempt to do so is a farce and ultimately pointless. Imagine if there was a state or federally mandated schedule for bowel movements?
4) I think it is far more important that I focus my life on being the best person I can be and treating others as God would have me conduct myself.

One more comment.... I never really liked Jack Black's work... until now.

All this is really about is that those that are against prop 8 want to redefine marriage. If you go and ask for a marriage liscence, they will ask you four questions relating to your request to get married. If you don't believe me, please go down to the court house and see for yourself. The questions they will ask you are: 1) Are you an Adult and are you marrying an adult? The answer must be yes. 2) Are you related to the person you are marrying? The answer must be no. 3) Are you already married? The answer must be no. 4) Is the person you want to marry of the opposite sex? The answer must be yes. If you incorrectly answer any one of these questions, you cannot get a marriage liscence. So any educated person would say, hey, if we can change the requirement that I can marry someone of the same sex as in question 4, then why can't we change the other 3 requirements. Now we can marry kids, our relatives, and be married to multiple partners. Come on America, think about it. This is a slippery slope. Let's work on giving civil unions all the rights of a traditional marriage and stop the bickering.