So, I'm glad that I don't live in California. Because that means I don't have to vote on Proposition 8. I don't understand the whole thing, really. The full text of the thing just states that the California constitution will now include a clause defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.
I personally think that that's the ideal situation. Heck, it's the way I'm going to raise BeeBoo and whatever babies follow. What I get confused about, though, is why something so linked to religion needs to be politicized.
I've really been generating ulcers about the fact that the LDS church has decided to be SO actively involved in the process. It's beyond just the normal "get out and vote the way you feel is right." In a recent broadcast they've asked people to commit to vote a certain way, and to convince other people to do so. It just seems so out of the norm for what I'm used to.
Probably the thing that has nagged me most is a discussion we had with some folks while visiting family. Both people in this couple insisted on browbeating me into the idea that voting for Proposition 8 is the only option as a good Mormon, if I lived in CA and could do so. One of the arguments that the wife used was that the Catholic church was going to lose its tax-exempt status because their social services won't adopt out to gay couples. That made me think about the consequences for the Church and not performing same-sex marriages in the temple...so I thought maybe she had a point. Well, turns out, it's bunk. The Catholic church may lose money from secular organizations that are subject to non-discrimination laws and therefore can't fund Catholic social services, but the church itself won't be harmed. I HATE WHEN PEOPLE BUILD ARGUMENTS ON THINGS THAT AREN'T TRUE.
Mostly because it just confuses me even more on an issue that I just don't know how to feel about.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Tell me about it. And in our ward, at least, there is little room for any nuance. Our bishop's wife actually said the other week that anyone who opposes it is an apostate and should go home and pray until they agree. But she is a little old and wacky. Our stake has actually asked us not to talk about it during Sunday meetings, and we can't use the church building for meetings about it. I think that's because their worried about tax status. But I'm still counting the Sundays until November so church can hopefully get back to normal. I've had way too many people make rather bigoted remarks to me just because they assume that the political climate at church justifies it. In stake conference a few weeks ago the president cautioned against making such remarks, but it's hard for people to grasp the difference between taking a political stance and still "loving the sinner". I'm trying to figure that one out too...
Amen. I don't like the inner issues it's making me face. We have a similar proposition here in AZ, though, so I have about 3 weeks to figure myself out.
Simply stated, laws are the legislation of morality. As members of the society we get to choose what laws are implemented. Churches feel obligated to defend issues like marriage between a man and a wife because they consider it to be a moral issue that has far-reaching effects. On a similar vein, a student taking a course at the university I attend refused to watch a movie his class was showing because it clearly contained material he found to be objectionable. In a teachers' meeting I attended, three people made a comment. The director of the undergraduate courses said we come to school to be exposed to controversial and objectionable material. A graduate student said if the student wanted to live in a bubble he should go to a private university. A professor who evaluates instructor performance then said the student must be mentally handicapped if he would have objections to the film. I've seen the movie and can understand the student's objections, so I decided stand up for him. I had a leg to stand on since the law allows the student to have religious objections and replace objectionable material with different homework. Imagine an academic world if laws allowed such an argument to be thrown out the window. It would make parenting that much harder. In my opinion, same-sex marriage is just the tip of the iceberg. If we don't pass laws to preserve the moral fabric of society, then someone else will pass laws that substitute it with a different fabric. Sorry to be so long-winded. I think the LDS church's official stance posted on lds.org puts it best. Obviously we're going to hear all sorts of ignorant nuances on the issue, but I don't think we should allow that to distract us from what is really on the line here.
I'm so torn on this one, and all I have to say about it is this: NPR story
Post a Comment