It’s Prop 8 again! (Vote No)

19 10 2008

It’s late here in Europe, no one is chatting to me online and Craigslist only offered up one message of a missed connection with a ‘redheaded goddess’ on the underground and sadly, it wasn’t about me. So I’m here again. And I just read my friend’s blog about Prop 8. We like to keep our sticky European fingers in the affairs of Californians! And if I do ever visit California, who’s taking me rollerblading whilst eating a raisin bagel and drinking fresh OJ??! 

Anyway, from there I found a random link to another blog about Proposition 8, I read it and read the comments. I also posted one back. And it gave me this thought regarding the concern of those who are worried that their religious-based, or religiously-sanctioned marriage will in some way be undermined or threatened or devalued if Proposition 8 is not over-turned. I add it here, and edit it a bit:

 

“Those who are joined in unity in the presence of their God, will still have that [ie that religious unity would still hold]. Same-sex marriage does not threaten the sanctity of religious-based marriages [ie people can still get married religiously]. Children who follow their parents’ choice of religion will still have that choice to get married in a religious setting, and their children too, if they so choose [because not all children want to be of the religion of their parents, we grow up and we can choose]. But religion is a belief system [ie a personal belief system, and not everyone is religious], and marriage can exist for all outside of it, and it should be allowed to all people should they choose that path. However, the point about marriage being instituted by God, does that mean that Christians, who do not believe in the same god as Muslims, would not recognise the marriage of two, heterosexual, Muslims? Because that Muslim marriage would not be instituted by their (Christian) God.

I put that last bit in bold because I think it’s quite a good point. So people of other religions, in opposite sex relationships would be accorded the same rights by law if they were married – even if a ‘different God’ sanctioned and institutionalised that marriage?? The concept that marriage is a ‘unity between a man and a woman’ is based in religion, and that should be kept out of citizens’ rights. I do acknowledge that religion has formed the backdrop to many of our current day morals, ie don’t kill, don’t steal, but these could also be seen to derive out of a process of civilization and advancement; it’s just that religions have framed them over time. Given also that religions have come and gone over the many years, and take many different forms and shapes across the world, but some principles are shared – ie, don’t steal or kill, then I would suggest that although, for example, English law is in part religion-based, much of the foundations could be seen to stem from outside of a religious framework. So state/law and religion can be kept separate, and marriage does not have to be, by definition, a unity between man and woman.

Advertisements

Actions

Information

13 responses

19 10 2008
spencer

Proposition 8 is more than same sex marriage its about protecting our sons and daughters from growing up in a world that teaches that being gay or lesbian is just as normal as being straight. I don’t want my sons and daughters being taught as young as five years old in school that it is okay to marry someone of their same sex. It is about the principle of religion. And protecting what God has set up as the correct way to replenish the earth. It is marriage between a Man and a Woman. God set Adam and Eve on earth to have their posterity fill the whole earth. It goes contrary to the laws set up by God himself. I have nothing against gay or lesbian individuals. I believe they can live their life how they please. I am against the teachings that go against the teachings of God. And we must fight to protect God’s holy ordinance of Marriage between one man and one woman.

Please go to http://www.protectmarriage.com to read more about the benefits of proposition 8.

19 10 2008
narrioch

Why are you so scared about your children being taught to at least be ‘aware’ that same-sex marriages exist? If you want to live in a mixed society, and not in an insular, closed off group then you must acknowledge that differences exist. Let your children decide for themselves at least. Children do grow up and question things for themselves, but I understand how some parents want to prevent that as much as possible. Believe me, the world’s population will not die out if the 1% of gay people are allowed to marry. So you state that Prop 8 is a principle of religion? Only your religion though. Stop being so egocentric. And, what about people who marry (straight couples) who don’t have children? Should they be somehow punished because in the eyes of you and your religion, they are not ‘replenishing the earth’? Marriage is not a holy ordinace, that is a definition you are using as a means of control and power. And God did not set Adam and Eve out to fill the earth with prosterity. He set them in a mythical garden, and told them not to eat from the tree of knowledge. When they did, he punished them. That sounds like control to me. Only do what ‘God’ tells you and don’t think for yourself. Please acknowledge that your religion is not the only one present in your country, and also that there are some people who are not religious. Are you against straight, non-religious couples getting ‘married’? If I marry a man are you against that union? Because it wouldn’t be in church. And yet as a straight couple I would be ‘married’ and be allowed all the rights avialable to me.
Your God’s holy ordinance will still be intact, you can still get married in church, and your children too, if they so wish. No one would take that away from you, and yet you want to argue and argue over the content and definition of the word marriage. Let gay people get married, let straight people get married. You will still have your holy ordinance.

19 10 2008
beautravail

Perhaps tangential to the original topic, but: ‘replenish the earth’? The earth is dying from the effects of overpopulation.

19 10 2008
narrioch

You and I know that, but we have to save that for our next essayette! I can’t wait to be a Starbuck’s mum and have five children, all dressed in pink and blue! boik.

19 10 2008
narrioch

I just thought – do you remember when people with red hair used to be thought of as witches? Preposterous!
No more rights for people with red hair! They are deviant and wicked and own cats and owls.

19 10 2008
VJohnson

Forget the rhetoric about who thinks who is wicked. There are practical and real religious freedom consequences. Check out this website http://www.prop8info.com. It has real news clips about real consequences, including Catholic Charities withdrawing adoption services from MA. This is not rhetoric or predictions, this is factual.

19 10 2008
narrioch

But those ‘real relgious freedom consequences’ are based on rhetoric, a very deep and harmful rhetoric that positions gay people as inferior to straight people. That marriage is a ‘religious’ based institution is, I think, flawed. I wrote a comment earlier on another site, that moved away from this part of the debate (the religious) and instead suggested that marriage should incur ‘no rights’ upon anyone. If you want to have a public show of commitment, to whomever you want, go for it – and yes, it could be performed in the presence of a religious minister. However, that marriage should not immediately confer certain rights upon that hetero couple, which are then denied to gay couples. At present if a straight couple get married they instantly get more recognition, even if just culturally and socially, and also importantly, legally. Currently, same-sex couples can not get married and so can not obtain those rights. The debate is not just religious, or homophobic, but about denying same-sex couples the taken for granted rights that hetero couples receive when ‘married’.

20 10 2008
VJohnson

Look at the facts as recorded in actual court cases in MA. It is absolutely not rhetoric, it is fact. Check out the links at http://www.prop8info.com. These news reports are absolutely not rhetoric. This is what has happened in MA and will happen in CA if prop 8 does not pass.

20 10 2008
narrioch

But my point is that at the heart of some religions, from which your ‘religious freedom’ stems, is a really harmful rhetoric that gays are unequal. The issue remains though, about rights. Straight couples should not procure immediate rights just by virute of being married. If they do, then same-sex couples should as well.

20 10 2008
quinbrowne

I just thought – do you remember when people with red hair used to be thought of as witches?

whoa! you mean, we changed that line of thought?

next thing you know, we’ll be letting people marry across race lines… and, *GASP* be wanting to give rights to gays to marry!!

are you MAD?? we must carry forth in insisting you are gay because someone touched you in your private places or because your mother made you a sissy. if we do this, kids won’t need to know about same sex marriage when they are 5 or 6, because they will only be attracted to other kids of the opposite sex at that age. they won’t ever think, “gee, i’m a boy, and i really love charles!”

sometimes humans scare the shit out of me.

20 10 2008
narrioch

Hee! I know – my friend and I have talked a lot about the scare of ‘catching gay’ and wondering if putting children in a big white room with no external interference would stop this pesky contagion…it would just send them bonkers though. I guess if you preach enough that something is wrong then young people won’t have a difference in opinion – and that is not autonomy, or self-knowledge, or self-discovery. I can get quite existential on this kind of topic.

But, golly am I glad I didn’t live in those backwards times when redheads were considered witches! Yep, humans are scary the way they can just decide that this year it’s the redheads, next year the pagans, next the blacks, then the indians, the gays… It’s a lack of understanding, diversity and fear that causes that. And probably power, and money sometimes.

21 10 2008
culturepress

narrioch, Thank you for all your great efforts in spreading the word about the bigotry of Prop 8, and for your very insightful and helpful comments on my one blog post about this topic! (I meant to thank you much sooner, but it’s hard to keep up with the comments, sometimes…!)

22 10 2008
narrioch

Hi CP – no worries! Thanks for dropping back in, even if one of my comments helps it’s a small step!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s




%d bloggers like this: