4.23.2010

equality

this is from a conversation on facebook about my status.

So let me get this straight - Larry King is getting his 8th divorce, Elizabeth Taylor is possibly getting married for a 9th time, Jesse James and Tiger Woods are screwing EVERYTHING, yet the idea of same-sex marriage is what is going to destroy the institution of marriage?? REALLY?

GA:Sounds right to me.

ME:give me a valid argument. alexae i know you're being cynical. ;)

GA:Definition of marriage: Man + woman... Need I say more?

ME: yes. separation of church and state. Need I say more?

GA:You asked for a valid argument. I gave you one! Notice YOU brought up religion, not me. There IS a difference between "religion" and "Family values". You can convince yourself that they're the same but they're not. Are Jesse James and Tiger Woods demonsrating good family values? No, but we all have our faults.

ME: but who defines family? what makes up family. in my opinion it is something that is completely individual and you really can't put a concise and absolute definition on a family. the gov't considers a single parent and children a family, it considers multi-family families a family under one roof. it considers you an yours a family. why does gender need to take a role other than as it is defined by religionists? i support marriage as a "sacred institution" within a religious context. as far as in the eyes of the government though... as long as whatever it is involves two consenting legal adults it's none of the government's business. institutional morality can only be institutionalized if it involves unwilling or unwitting parties.

GA:I'll give you a hint: a Family starts with a marriage. (see earlier post for a definition of a marriage) I recognize some families start without a marriage, but it still starts with a man and a woman. How can say "sacred institution" and separation of church and state in the same breath? Single parent and children IS a family most if it at least. If the father doesn't live with them do they cease to be a family? No- they're just one critical member short.

ME:opinion, not fact. family does not start with a man or a woman consistently 100% of the time therefore that is a false theory. a family can start with an adoption, guardianship, fostering, or simply living together for more than the legal definition. a family can start in an instant. marriage is a religious rite that should be reserved for and preserved by the religious. the fact that any joe blow can become a legal representative of the state he lives by applying for a ministry off the internet and paying $20 does not "maintain the sanctity marriage" marriage shoud remain in churches. civil union should be recognized by government and consist of any two consenting adults. and the two ideals should remain separate but equal. because as the declaration of independence declares and our own psyche adopts "all... are created equal" something that is sacred transcends borders. church and state should not have influence one over the other. that's how i manage to say it in the same breath.

i think america is afraid that by granting normal caring people the same rights that they have it will some how cheapen their own existence. i think that america is afraid that they will somehow be forced to perform homo marriages in their cathedrals and their temples and their synagogues. it's poppycock.

i think americans are just afraid in general to think with rational and with critical thinking skills and see that we as a nation are denying rights and privileges to a group of people that work here, live here, pay taxes, eat at our tables, are members of our families, believers in our faith and members of our military and representatives in government. we are systematically discriminating with overt prejudice and somehow we're trying to justify that error. and that scares the living hell out of this nation. we are scared to death to admit that we have wronged someone. we are scared to death to admit that we are flawed.

GA:Your examples of adoption, guardianship, foster ect. Those are second chances at a family. Where do you think those children came from? I'll give you a hint: a man and a woman. I can go into more detail if you need me to.

So rational and critical thinking is required to understand same-sex marriage? So if I font agree with it I'm not thinking straight? As far as that goes "denying normal people"?? Homosexuals aren't normal! There I said it.

ME:we're not just defining procreation here... we're talking about marriage and rights. not sex. we all got the birds and the bees conversation at one point or another. since we're talking about kids... there are millions of children around the world that have no families. why would we deny a child the right to be loved simply because of gender roles?

rights are blind. no person should be denied the opportunities and rights granted another. regardless of any discriminating factor. end of sentence.

to do so is to act beyond our own sphere of influence and take upon ourselves a mantel of responsibility that we as a nation are obviously incapable of bearing

every nation in this world has fought against one form or another of discrimination and this is just the next chapter in that fight. 10 years from now we'll look back and see how foolish we were.

your OPINION is noted but not accepted.

Homosexuality has even been recognized by nearly every medical professional as a genetic or biological circumstance. it is as normal as brown hair and green eyes.

again i state my original argument that no right should be denied two consenting adults.

you are thinking "straight" that's the problem ;)

but in the end... how does it affect you? how will it hurt your family? how will it hurt your community? how would it change your life for the worse?

this nation fought against gender and race equality since we began and look where we're at now. no body is hurting... we're not falling apart at the seams. it's all OK.

GA: There is such thing as a child with no family. Their family may have abandonned them or no longer among the living but does that mean they don't have a family? I know were not talking about procreation, you asked about family, and I shared my opinion.

ME: i appreciate your opinion... but gary i for one will never be able to have a child in this life. i will never be able to marry in the temple or have that eternal family in this life.

solitude is a very scary prospect. i would love to have the right to adopt a child and raise a family as a single man. that right is denied me because of fear mongering and hate. how is that right?

i know that i will never marry in this life to either gender. but i would like to have some basic rights. i would like to feel like an equal and contributing citizen in this nation. i pay my dues now where is my reward?!?!

how dare men and women that I have never met and that do not know me stand up and claim that i am a pedophile and a pervert and a sin against god! how dare they strip from me my dignity when they cannot even look me in my face. who are these people that trample upon my emotions when i have struggled my entire life just to remain alive?

i am an american and i deserve what all americans merit regardless of who my heart chooses.

GA:As far as rights are concerned I take rights away fr someone everytime I put handcuffs on them. Or when i pull them over and they no longer have the right to drive away as long as my overhead lights are on. I take away certain rights, that is a consequence of the choices they have made. Marriage is a right that is taken away when you make the choice to be homosexual.

ME:no you are very wrong gary, you have NO POWER to take away rights. that individual elects to abandon his or her rights because he chooses to act outside of the confines of the law. you are simply there to enforce that law. you have no power to take away their rights. that person forfeits their rights.

and to clarify, homosexuality, is not a choice. it is a reality of existence. the same as your gargantuan height or the individuals i work with and their developmental disability or my sister's blond hair or your wife's dark complexion. it is just a part of life. you better study up on your modern revelation ;)

nathan - signature 001

3 comments:

Taylor said...

First, I want to say how seriously, and difficultly I think about this. The California 2008 election was one of the most difficult things I've dealt with politically/morally/religiously.

I think this situation is far more complicated than most people are willing to try and decipher, and I thank you for venturing into it, Nathan.

This isn't really the right forum for me to state my opinions or views on the matter, but I do appreciate your openness and thoughts. I promise that this is a struggle for me to understand as well, and I don't take your position lightly.

beaux said...

taylor - thank you so much i know that prop 8 was an ugly battle. and to be honest one that i supported as well only because i believe that marriage should not be a government institution. i think it should remain a religious practice and granted according to the beliefs and practices of each religion. civil rights should just be a given and government should not interfere with morality.

derrick - i'm going to respectfully delete your comments because this blog is not a place for "bitchy" comments. yep i'm censoring. if you wanna rip me a new one feel free to email me privately.

al'xae said...

Uh... could you make it so that I don't look like I'm GA... I put up one snarky comment that you edited out, but I'm on your side bud!