Monday, November 17, 2008

Follow-up to "Reaction"

Okay, so I said I wasn't going to post again ... but you know how I'm such a fan-girl for that Eric D. Snider (I'm actually starting to refer to him as "Eric" ... in an email, he said that I could! Squee!!!)

So, I liked his "Snide Remarks" about this issue. And, oh, the first couple paragraphs are pretty darn offensive ... unless you keep in mind that he is a SATIRIST. He uses these words as weapons of wit and brilliance to strip down to the heart of the matter (Yes, I AM biased. Because I adore him, okay? Get over it.)

(And Michael knows that I'm a fan-girl. And he's okay with it. So ... yeah.)

BUT, without further ado, here's the link: The Gay Marriage Column (Snide Remarks,

And I liked reading through the column. It's good to see different opinions.

And I totally cackled out loud at the line about the homosexual contigent wanting to replace the national anthems with something by Sondheim.
(Katie, any requests from Into the Woods? ... Although Sweeney Todd is pretty full of win, too. ^_^ ... And we're not even in that contigent! :P Just theater freaks. ^_^)

UPDATE: Here are some of my favorite comments --
  #61: " ... Among other commonalities between Mormons and gays—musical theater! Let's not argue over Osmond and Minelli, but celebrate the commonality! At one point there was talk of a Mormon march to counter the gay march, and I had a vision of the two groups approaching each other, snapping their fingers a la'West Side Story.'"
      TOTALLY burst out laughing at that one. Laughed harder than I have in weeks!

And I REALLY liked this one:
 #79.  To answer the question posed by #64, from my understanding of the opinion written that overturned Prop 22, and thus made SSM legal, the CA State Supreme Court articulated the right to marry as a more narrow 'right to marry the person you choose' (which assumes that person chooses you, isn't a close relative or a minor, and neither of you are already married). So that is why it is deemed a civil rights issue.

As far as rights, domestic partnership laws in CA already gave SS couples the same rights as marriage, though the Defense of Marriage Act (at the Federal level) specifically prohibits civil unions/domestic partnerships. Personally, I'm not in favor of altering the definition of marriage, but I really have no problem with civil unions. It's a different relationship, why shouldn't it have a different name? That remark may sound a little flippant, I know, because obvious the difference is that in some people's minds, a civil union will always be, ipso facto, secondary to a marriage. If the gay community is looking for a legal recognition that affords them the same rights and responsibilities as marriage, they have that (in CA) with domestic partnerships. If they're seeking to be accepted by society at large, frankly, I don't think having SSM legal will do that. The majority of the people will still think it's wrong. So I guess my point is I have no idea how to best make the whole thing work out for everyone. Ahem, good thing I'm posting a comment...

But before I go, I just have to point out that I find the comments (a few here, mostly other places) along the lines of "SSM won't affect your straight marriage" a little hollow. Changing the definition of the fundamental unit of society will obviously change society as a whole. That's the point, right? Its not that Prop 8 supporters think that, with SSM legal, suddenly they will be less married. Their point is that making SSM legal will change their society in a fundamental way, and they don't want that change.

I like how Amp put it. That second paragraph really seems to sum up what Michael and I talk about. Do we feel that people who are homosexual should be treated as criminals or second-class citizens? HELL NO! 

BUT we respect their decisions to act as they choose. And we ask that they respect the fact that our beliefs do not allow us to condone behavior that we are taught is immoral. It does not make them bad people. Like I've said time and time again, we all are human (especially me) and we all will sin. We are all still wonderful people (even if we, ourselves, don't realize it. Or even act like it). I know that these individuals have a hard lot in life. It is not always easy to handle the trials that we have. I am not going to expect themselves to "live a life of single blessedness" since, hey, I'm not. :P 

If I haven't gone through your trials, I know that I really have no room to speak. Therefore, I'm not going to judge you. However, if our prophets tell us, for generations, that something is wrong and there are certain actions that we, as followers of Christ, need to do ... Well, I have faith that God knows more than me. And I'm going to follow His directions.
(Hey, if I'm in doubt, I'm more than welcome to pray and ponder. And I'm still free to act how I choose. As is everyone. That's part of the joy of being human ... you do get to choose your actions and reactions.)

And, gosh, I do adore Eric. So, go, go, go read him!!! (But don't feel FORCED to do it. Do it because you WANT to.)

1 comment:

Kate the Great said...


I can think of a few Sondheim songs I'd use, although I don't think that they Homosexual contingent would like the context in which I would use them.

And I loved the Snide remarks column.

Counting ...

HTML hit counter -
EU Users: This might use cookies. If it does, let me know and I can work on getting one that doesn't.