In which we shall see: A very long post that carefully rants and raves, the possible destruction of a goodly part of my Facebook friends list, and a hope for something more than what we're getting. (I'm a little nervous, but I'll say it anyway. Gulp.)
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
For the last couple of weeks I have had the overwhelming urge to duck and cover. I've never experienced this before in the wake of an election, and I hoped that if I ignored it the feeling would go away. It hasn't. I decided then that the indication was that instead I should "stand up and be counted", and that is my intention here.
In the fallout from the passage of Proposition 8 I have been reading and researching voraciously, and I am astounded at the amount and the level of discussion that has promulgated. (I've been reading posts from lots of very smart people, which is what leads me to the usage of words like "promulgated." Sorry. It will probably happen again.) Currently, my overwhelming urge is to send the entire "gay rights" movement over to stand in a corner until they regain control of themselves. This is probably a condescending response on my part, and I do understand that very real feelings and motivations are involved in what is turning out to be a fairly massive issue. HOWEVER - This is a republic. We are governed by democratic principles. We hold an election, we vote on issues, and majority rules. THIS IS THE WAY IT WORKS. If you don't get what you want from an election, you have several options: one is to continue to participate in the system until the changes you hope for occur, another involves moving to Europe. It is not all right to throw yourself down on the floor, beat your arms and legs, break your toys, and scream at the top of your lungs, all in the hopes that things will turn out the way you wish because you are louder than everyone else.
Listen - the majority of definitions I've found describe "marriage" as a "contract between an man and a woman" etc... "Civil union" is defined as a "contract between two members of the same sex in which both parties have the same benefits, protections, and responsibilities as spouses in a marriage." So, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM? Groups are shouting that their "rights" are being restricted - I say, where do you get the idea that marriage is a right? Are you saying that everyone is entitled to be married, and to have that union recognized not only by the parties involved but by the government and every other individual living in the country as well? My goodness, but some people are feeling awfully self-involved lately! I'm not married, and have never been married - whom should I sue? Whom should I picket and protest? "Marriage" is not guaranteed by any governmental document, and is not listed with any group of rights to which the people of this nation are guaranteed. If anything, marriage is the domain of religion, and only secondarily recommended to governmental purview because it is a long-accepted societal unit and recognized as beneficial to the growth and well-being of the nation. The same cannot be said of same-sex relationships, though in general those relationships are not opposed or restricted by the civil government.
So let me ask - why the extreme desire to be "married"? If you don't believe in God, it doesn't make much sense to argue for a situation designed and originated by God. If you do believe in God, it doesn't make much sense to fight for your "right" to something He has rejected. It appears to me that you are seeking the label of "marriage" so as to be validated in your lifestyle by those around you, not because the word or institution itself actually means that much (see RE: religion, God). Here's the thing - I don't care to validate your lifestyle, anymore than I am concerned with having you validate mine. I will work, laugh, study, play, converse, and cry with you, but I am not interested in having your bedroom activities shoved in my face. Boundaries - look into them, please.
In for a penny, in for a pound - It is my personal belief that homosexuality is a choice. Sexuality as a behavior of any kind is a choice. Urges, inclinations, attractions, etc... may indeed be hormonal, chemical, even genetic - but actions based on those feelings occur by choice. The person you sleep with (or don't) is a matter of decision, not fate or coercion. A person may very well be homosexual by "wiring", if you will, but they are under no compulsion to participate in homosexuality except by conscious decision. I know that this is a simplistic perspective. I also know that we are more than animals being led around by our instincts. The fact that I am a 34-year-old virgin is a matter of choice... believe me, I have had opportunities to alter that status. For various reasons (which are, quite frankly, none of your business) I have not. This doesn't make me better or holier or smarter (well, OK, maybe a little smarter than some) than anyone else, it just means that I have made particular decisions regarding my own sexuality, and I do not need those decisions to be regulated by anyone else.
Did the "gay rights" group really expect the religious sector to suddenly roll over and hide in regards to a principle they have ALWAYS opposed, just because the movement was/is noisy and yells things like "repression", "discrimination", and "hate"? Haven't they been paying any attention to the last 2000 years? Let me repeat - "Marriage" is an institution that has always stood as a union between a man and a womon. There are biological, religious, emotional, philosophical, sociological, and ecological reasons this has always been the case. WE DO NOT KNOW THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS of homosexual relationships on society at large, mainly because every civilization that sanctioned homosexuality has been destroyed. We have no precedence, no prior examples to look at. It should come as no surprise that society at large is extremely leery of making such a huge shift in traditional, tested, accepted morays in favor of something that cannot be judged accurately, but that has looming potential disadvantages to the well-being of future generations and the stability of that societal foundation.
Finally, a word to those who sneer at the "brainwashed sheep" that make up religious congregations - I am opinionated, lucid, occasionally eloquent, educated, and inclined towards study and research. My choice to follow the direction of one I revere as a prophet is just that - my choice. I am not being led around by the nose, and I reject out of hand the assumption that I will do whatever I am told, just because the church says so. How foolish to suppose that just because I support and believe something you do not, I am stupid and robotic. I do not assign such a role to anyone who does not believe the same thing I do, and I would ask for similar courtesy.
Polarizing the issue further by demonizing anyone on either side of the divide is not productive or beneficial. Stop it, all of you/us - grow up, take a deep breath, go wash your hands and face, and come back to the table ready to sit up straight and discuss things like adults. Temper tantrums will not help. Name-calling (from either side) will not help. I may not condone what you do, but I respect your right to choose to do it. I expect that same perspective from you.
Showing posts with label Proposition 8. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Proposition 8. Show all posts
November 16, 2008
October 23, 2008
Day 23 - The "Deep Thoughts" Post
In which we shall see: Lots and lots of words. Really. Read at your own risk.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Over the last couple of months several major happenings and issues have come to the forefront of national and international awareness - financial crisis, elections, and Proposition 8. From various conversations (online and in RL) with intelligent, concerned individuals, and from my own reading of pertinent articles and commentary, I have come to a few conclusions. These conclusions are my own supposition and opinion, and I am no authority nor representative voice for any organization involved. These are my own thoughts and feelings.
A friend recently asked, “So, who are you going to vote for?” This question led to an hour-long discussion of some of those issues mentioned above. My answer is that I’m still working on it – this seems to be an election that REQUIRES more research and study than any I’ve seen before. It also leads to the idea of inevitability – living in a particular state, why should a person vote when the outcome for that state is essentially determined? I’ve decided that voting is not necessarily about contributing to the end result (any more than one grain of sand contributes to the character of an entire beach) but about knowing for oneself just what one is willing to support and stand up for. I think that before much longer it will become vital for individuals to decide for themselves who they are and what they believe and not succumb to any kind of “flow” or “wave”. I believe that voting today represents the opportunity for us to become deliberate, decisive, regardless of whether or not we “win”.
That conversation, like many others recently, turned to Proposition 8. I know that much has been criticized in the decision of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to actively (and very unusually) step forward and encourage its members in California to vote “yes” for this amendment that will “provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” I have carefully read The Divine Institution of Marriage, the article produced by the Church to state its position on this proposition, and discussed at length the ramifications of such a position.
Here’s what I think.
I do not believe that the Church is in any way biased against or “out to get” anyone who is same-sex oriented. It is also my belief that in the end the Church is also not opposing same-sex marriage in and of itself, as such a marriage has become essentially a civil ceremony. For thousands of years religion (God, the Bible, prophets) have taught that such a union is wrong. From there, the choice to participate in such behavior belongs to the individuals involved, not the Church or any other entity. Choice, of all things, is sacred. However, at times the consequences of choices can adversely affect the future lives and choices of others – and this is the point at which regulations are installed. For example, one friend argued that while the idea of abortion was repulsive to them, they were also very reluctant to restrict a person’s freedom regarding the use of their own body. My response is that while, yes, a person has the right to choose their own behaviors and activities, they do not have the right to cut off the potential choices another might make by prematurely ending a life. (Please do not draw any crazy conclusions that I am trying to say that all same-sex oriented individuals support abortion. The example here is “freedom of choice” vs. “accepting consequences and restricting some personal freedoms for the safety and benefit of others.” Also, this example refers to choices made, not to consequences imposed by the choices of others, or instances where no choice is involved.)
So, Proposition 8 – In my opinion the Church is not looking to restrict same-sex marriage because it is a “moral” or “religious” issue. It is both those things, but again, all are free to choose their own lifestyle. However – the CHILDREN that will be raised in those families will not be afforded the same opportunities, and this is the point from which I believe the Church’s concern commences. Current political policy dictates that if same-sex marriage becomes an accepted practice, schools will be OBLIGATED to teach that such behavior is a valid, accepted lifestyle (rather than an issue of moral choice), and parents will have no recourse to oppose such teaching. Additionally, children in such families, no matter how well loved and raised, will never be able to be sealed eternally to their parents. One debater argued that the children could always choose for themselves to marry a spouse in the temple – but if parents are not living in agreement with the teachings of the Church, what is the likelihood that the children will? These concerns have been in the national eye for a relatively short period of time; certainly not long enough for any incisive conclusions about the cause-and-effect of same-sex parenting on children to be reached. Consider this: when the Word of Wisdom was given in the early days of the Church it stood in opposition to several accepted practices of the day. Over a hundred years later it has been accepted by secular medical practitioners as an exemplary way to live, and scientifically demonstrated to uphold the principles of health it promised back in the 1800’s. It was given by a prophet, and those who followed it were upheld in their choice.
The bottom line is this: The Church has made a request of its members in the current election in California, and those who follow will be upheld in their choice. Honestly, this direction from the Church may not succeed in confirming Proposition 8. Those who vote “yes”, though, will have the satisfaction of defending their beliefs and the security of knowing they have listened to the prophet. These are decisions we all need to ponder and stand prepared to make – I also believe the time is coming that we will ALL be required to make them.
For additional (and beautifully written!) commentary on faith, individuality, and obedience, go here, here, then here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Over the last couple of months several major happenings and issues have come to the forefront of national and international awareness - financial crisis, elections, and Proposition 8. From various conversations (online and in RL) with intelligent, concerned individuals, and from my own reading of pertinent articles and commentary, I have come to a few conclusions. These conclusions are my own supposition and opinion, and I am no authority nor representative voice for any organization involved. These are my own thoughts and feelings.
A friend recently asked, “So, who are you going to vote for?” This question led to an hour-long discussion of some of those issues mentioned above. My answer is that I’m still working on it – this seems to be an election that REQUIRES more research and study than any I’ve seen before. It also leads to the idea of inevitability – living in a particular state, why should a person vote when the outcome for that state is essentially determined? I’ve decided that voting is not necessarily about contributing to the end result (any more than one grain of sand contributes to the character of an entire beach) but about knowing for oneself just what one is willing to support and stand up for. I think that before much longer it will become vital for individuals to decide for themselves who they are and what they believe and not succumb to any kind of “flow” or “wave”. I believe that voting today represents the opportunity for us to become deliberate, decisive, regardless of whether or not we “win”.
That conversation, like many others recently, turned to Proposition 8. I know that much has been criticized in the decision of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints to actively (and very unusually) step forward and encourage its members in California to vote “yes” for this amendment that will “provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” I have carefully read The Divine Institution of Marriage, the article produced by the Church to state its position on this proposition, and discussed at length the ramifications of such a position.
Here’s what I think.
I do not believe that the Church is in any way biased against or “out to get” anyone who is same-sex oriented. It is also my belief that in the end the Church is also not opposing same-sex marriage in and of itself, as such a marriage has become essentially a civil ceremony. For thousands of years religion (God, the Bible, prophets) have taught that such a union is wrong. From there, the choice to participate in such behavior belongs to the individuals involved, not the Church or any other entity. Choice, of all things, is sacred. However, at times the consequences of choices can adversely affect the future lives and choices of others – and this is the point at which regulations are installed. For example, one friend argued that while the idea of abortion was repulsive to them, they were also very reluctant to restrict a person’s freedom regarding the use of their own body. My response is that while, yes, a person has the right to choose their own behaviors and activities, they do not have the right to cut off the potential choices another might make by prematurely ending a life. (Please do not draw any crazy conclusions that I am trying to say that all same-sex oriented individuals support abortion. The example here is “freedom of choice” vs. “accepting consequences and restricting some personal freedoms for the safety and benefit of others.” Also, this example refers to choices made, not to consequences imposed by the choices of others, or instances where no choice is involved.)
So, Proposition 8 – In my opinion the Church is not looking to restrict same-sex marriage because it is a “moral” or “religious” issue. It is both those things, but again, all are free to choose their own lifestyle. However – the CHILDREN that will be raised in those families will not be afforded the same opportunities, and this is the point from which I believe the Church’s concern commences. Current political policy dictates that if same-sex marriage becomes an accepted practice, schools will be OBLIGATED to teach that such behavior is a valid, accepted lifestyle (rather than an issue of moral choice), and parents will have no recourse to oppose such teaching. Additionally, children in such families, no matter how well loved and raised, will never be able to be sealed eternally to their parents. One debater argued that the children could always choose for themselves to marry a spouse in the temple – but if parents are not living in agreement with the teachings of the Church, what is the likelihood that the children will? These concerns have been in the national eye for a relatively short period of time; certainly not long enough for any incisive conclusions about the cause-and-effect of same-sex parenting on children to be reached. Consider this: when the Word of Wisdom was given in the early days of the Church it stood in opposition to several accepted practices of the day. Over a hundred years later it has been accepted by secular medical practitioners as an exemplary way to live, and scientifically demonstrated to uphold the principles of health it promised back in the 1800’s. It was given by a prophet, and those who followed it were upheld in their choice.
The bottom line is this: The Church has made a request of its members in the current election in California, and those who follow will be upheld in their choice. Honestly, this direction from the Church may not succeed in confirming Proposition 8. Those who vote “yes”, though, will have the satisfaction of defending their beliefs and the security of knowing they have listened to the prophet. These are decisions we all need to ponder and stand prepared to make – I also believe the time is coming that we will ALL be required to make them.
For additional (and beautifully written!) commentary on faith, individuality, and obedience, go here, here, then here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)