Sunday, November 16, 2008

Reaction ...

(This is in part in response to my friend, Prissy's post. I agree with her ... and I'm not near so tactful as my dear friend. ^_^)

I know that I can (and most likely, AM) inviting flack by saying this.
But I'm gonna say it anyway.

Why the double-standard in how people are reacting to Proposition 8?

If it had been voted down, would ANYONE put up with a single person talking about boycotting Massachusetts or Connecticut or California? Would anyone have put up with a single sign or protester outside a building in which same-sex marriages were being performed?

Would anyone have put up with the success that enabled Prop 8 to have been passed being blamed on Blacks, Hispanics, Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Muslims, Asians, the Inuit, Native Americans, the elderly, Yuppies, or the mentally infirm?
And why haven't the protesters gone after the other groups that voted to pass it?

...To be completely blunt, WHY the HELL is it allowable to blame it on one church? A church whose California voting age population is less than 5% of the population. (I mean, hey if "those dang MaHRmons"  [I spell it that way because, whenever I hear anyone talking smack about the church or its members, that's how they say it! I NEVER hear it any other way. Dunno why.] were in the majority, then I would give them some leeway to complain.)

And then threatening a boycott to a whole other state? Unless those Uthans suddenly developed wings and California citizenship, they really can't be blamed. And you can't blame The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints itself for raising money. They didn't donate a dime (or any other imcriment of money).  

If you're mad about it, then YES, DO what Arnold Schwarzeneggar suggested: Exercise your right to democracy. If it gets voted down, put it on the ballot again. (I think that's really what the blurb that Glassman mentioned in this post's comments refers to. I may not support the vision of the opponents of Prop 8 ... but I am more than willing to let them put it on the ballot again and again. If it gets passed, it gets passed [God help us. :P], but they are within their legal rights to keep lobbying for it.)

Heck, if it HADN'T passed, I'd be for it going back on the ballots. It's always worth another shot, right? But if it KEEPS getting voted down ... I think that would help solve this ... situation.

And, oh my heck, our missionaries wouldn't be allowed in a house of females without another male ... let alone ravage through your stuff!! If my husband isn't home (and, remember, I've got two kids!), they have to wait out on the porch until he comes back! So, that commerical that was being passed around? TOTALLY FALACIOUS! 
(It be like if *I* created a commerical saying that if Prop 8 failed, homosexuals would kidnap our children and raise them in brothels or some such claptrap. I *know* people that have "alternative lifestyles" ... and they're perfectly nice folks. I love them ... and I tolerate their beliefs ... I don't have to approve of their behavior. Heck, I don't approve of MY behavior at times!)

The main point that I have is that, under Californian law, domestic partnerships between same-sex couples is ALREADY protected. I respect that. I support that.
I do not support calling it marriage. 

Calling a same-sex union marriage seems to be a way to "sanitize" and mainstream this into society.  You can put lipstick on a pitbull (since that seems to be the popular phrase) and it is NOT Marilyn Monroe.  

I do not HATE people that are different than me. I may not approve of their actions/choices. 
BUT, as we are taught in church (this church, dear to my heart, that is being unjustly accused of teaching hate and intimidation), we are all FREE to make our OWN decisions. We are not to treat people as their decisions ... we are allowed to repent. (Just because you tell a lie doesn't mark you as a LIAR with an 'L' sewn onto your collar or anything for the rest of your life.) We are all mortal beings, doing the best we can. We all make mistakes, we all have lots to learn, ... and, most importantly, we are ALL children of our Heavenly Father. Jesus loves each one of us, no matter what we do or have done.  ... And, since our goal is to be LIKE Jesus, it is our duty to LOVE every person and treat them as Jesus would.

Does Jesus approve of everyone's choices? (That's like asking, does Jesus like it when we sin/abuse children/kill each other/disrepect the bonds of marriage [e.g., extramarital sex])
No. BUT He still loves us and will treat us with respect.

And THAT is what the Church teaches.

"By their fruits ye shall know them." ... How are people treating each other? 

I find it to be an incredible double-standard that these supporters of same-sex marriage find it acceptable to single out another minority to rail on ... yet, anyone who DOESN'T agree with them is automatically slapped with the title of "INTOLERANT BIGOT" and decried. 

It's really a no-win situation. 

HOWEVER, I do find it very interesting how some of the reactions go ...

Here's
how the Church is handling these protesters:

Attacks on churches and intimidation of people of faith have no place in civil discourse over controversial issues.  People of faith have a democratic right to express their views in the public square without fear of reprisal.  Efforts to force citizens out of public discussion should be deplored by people of goodwill everywhere.   

We call upon those who have honest disagreements on this issue to urge restraint upon the extreme actions of a few that are further polarizing our communities and urge them to act in a spirit of mutual respect and civility towards each other.

Hmm ... Interesting. An attitude of "Don't hate them. Be nice and work out your problems."
I really have little doubt that if it were the other way around, and the Church was the one decrying the result of the voting, they (the vocal supporters of SSM)'d be handing out heaping portions of Shut-the-flip-up. 

(Yes, I really do feel that way. So sue me! Well, don't really, because I'm poor and I'd like to TRY to save some money for my kids to go to college ... or at least a trip to Disneyland.)

And, get this, CATHOLICS are supporting us. ... While our beliefs aren't all that different for the most bit, there is OFTEN a bit of a rift between the Catholic Church and the LDS Church.
But the former [Catholic] Bishop of SLC, the
 head of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Sacramento, Bishop William Weigand says:

"Bigoted attacks on Mormons for the part they played in our coalition are shameful and ignore the reality that Mormon voters were only a small part of the groundswell that supported Proposition 8.
"As the former bishop of the Diocese of Salt Lake City, I can attest to the fact that followers of the Mormon faith are a good and generous people with a long history of commitment to family and giving to community causes.
"I personally decry the bigotry recently exhibited towards the members of the Church of the Latter Day Saints--coming from the opponents of Proposition 8, who ironically, have called those of us supporting traditional marriage intolerant.
"I call upon the supporters of same-sex marriage to live by their own words--and to refrain from discrimination against religion and to exercise tolerance for those who differ from them. I call upon them to accept the will of the people of California in the passage of Proposition 8."
I think that Bishop Weigand has put it VERY well -- use the Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have others do to you. (Or as Confucious said: Do not unto others as you would have them not do unto you." ... Or, Rodney King's "Why can't we all get along?" ... Okay, that's just attributed to him. But STILL!!)
So, for all the blathering on and how irritated that I can get about this ... I know that the Church is true. I know that our Prophet, Thomas S. Monson, is led by God. I know that we have been told that same-sex marriage is not in God's plan. I know that everyone is my spiritual brother or sister ... and I'm going to love them as they are, God help them! I do NOT have to agree with everyone else. I am entitled to my own opinion and beliefs. I am also entitled to my own vote. I am deserving of respect -- just the same respect as if I did support SSM.
I will respect you, whoever you are, just as much -- regardless of how you did/will/would have voted.
(Hey, I like that whole "Namaste"-thing  -- Because I do recognize that you, like I, have a divine nature. You are of infinite worth. And nothing anyone could do or say will change that. It's part of my whole "life is good/life is precious" belief.)
And just because I might not agree with you ... well it doesn't change how much I like you as a person. I won't shove my rhetoric down your throat. I expect the same privilege.
Okay, ONE bit of rhetoric -- From the Articles of Faith of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (articles eleven and twelve):
  • We claim the privilege of worshiping Almighty God according to the dictates of our own conscience, and allow all men the same privilege, let them worship how, where, or what they may.
  • We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.
If the law is changed, we will follow it. 
And your religious preference is YOURS. As mine is MINE. We don't have to agree on it. Just respect each others' right to worship how we will.

6 comments:

Brooke said...

you are probably surprised that I havent replied to this post yet...I do believe that there would have been an incredible upheavel if prop 8 had been voted down.

My real question for those that are for it is: WHy do you care about someone elses personal life? Do you think church and state should remain seperate?

Allanna said...

Because it's not just THEIR personal lives. Like I said, I really couldn't care less about domestic partnerships. It IS their lives ... they can do what they feel they should.

I, however, DO think that if it hadn't been voted down, many churches WOULD have been sued for NOT performing those unions.

And, that would have completely negated any semblance of "separation of church and state." If we all have to worship one way, regardless of sect, then this would be a form of theocracy.

And ... I don't know that church and state CAN always remain mutually exclusive -- our laws are, for a large part, based on Judeo-Christian codes/morals. If we do declare that church and state MUST be completely separate, then wouldn't part of that be demanding that our political leaders be forbidden to participate in ANY religious activity? Because that IS a possibility. (I know it's completely radical ... but you and I both know that there are people out there that would like nothing better.) (Of course, there are people out there that think that Red Bull is delicious. ... THEY are dangerous. [Sorry, Ty! It's NASTY!!!] But that is neither here nor there.)

But, I do strongly believe that (1) everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion. And that (2) it's silly to target one SMALL group ... Not that I think this vocal group SHOULD, mind you, but why NOT target the Catholics?
(And I thin the answer is that if they TRIED to, they'd come under such political/social backlash that it'd make their heads spin like Lind Blair in Poltergeist [Not that I've seen it. :(] AND it would not further their aims at all. ... But, hey, picking on those Mormons? It's not like WE'RE people or anything. I wouldn't say the things that they're saying about us about someone's DOG. Or Stalin or Hilter. ... They're accusing us of some wild things. And I don't think it's right to do.)

I think it's sweet that you're so open-minded, though. Yet another thing I luff about you, m'dear!

(But do you really think that the Church would be threatening boycotts of California? Have we [as the Church, that is] boycotted Massachusetts? ... I haven't HEARD of it. But, hey, I live under a rock, so I could totally be wrong.)

Besides, I think that it'd crueler to those under SSM-bonds to have to return to the state they were married in, in order to get a divorce.

I really do agree with a statement that I heard to the effect of "Abortion rights should be left up to the states and the same-sex marriage issue should be decided as a nation."

It'd be much fairer to all involved. I wouldn't want a same-sex couple trapped into a marriage because they couldn't afford to leave their life in another state just to move back to get a divorce.
It'd have pissed me off if that were the case for my family and friends, regardless of orientation. If you have a right to a legally-recognized marriage, it should be recognized EVERYWHERE ... like in the whole UNIVERSE. Not just one state.

I'm just sayin'. Excuse my HUGELY VERBOSE tangent. ^_^

Brooke said...

No need to excuse your tangent. I quite enjoyed it.

I dont think chuches would come under the fire for not performing gay marriages. The "Mormons" dont allow everyone to get a temple marriage regardless if they are legally able,and no one has sued them as far as I know. Definately no one has won their case.

I understand that currently our laws are largely judeo-Christian...but is that right? I think it really isnt. THat is why I call for change.

I really always need a cause, dont I? And not just a regular cause..a controversial one...

I am such an attention whore.

Allanna said...

"Boo, you whore." <-- Obligatory Mean Girls quote. :P

But the Church also performs civil ceremonies in its buildings. And, therefore, could come under fire if someone really wanted to pick a fight.

And there are lots of parallels between a good deal of religions (the whole don't-kill-thing ... and like I mentioned in the original post, the similarities between the Golden Rule and one of Confucius' sayings). And, there is theory that our government's laws are more based on Freemasonry than on strictly Judeo-Christian beliefs. And there are many deists that are in that organization. (Srsly, I Googled it. And it's in multiple sites. See? I tried cross-referencing! Because I'm such a knowledge freak!!)
(And, dude, I freakin' ADORE the Dali Lama! I just want to give him a hug and put him in my pocket! He's completely DARLING! ... and in that Discovery Channel commercial, where the Buddhist monks sing that they love the whole world, I get all teary-eyed and know that they DO LOVE THE WHOLE WORLD!!)(And that last bit happens ALL the time, not just when Auntie Flo drops by, ifywim. aityd.)

And, hey, we all have things that we're passionate about. I like to learn stuff. You like to be a crusader. It takes all kinds in this world. Or else it would be BORING. And, as Eloise (Kay Thompson) would say, "Being bored is not allowed." ^_^

Brooke said...

you still have to interview with the bishop to get married in the church right? I know I did....


I am not worried about being boring and you shouldnt be either. That isnt a word I would use to describe either of us...

Allanna said...

I think that you have to at least talk to the bishop, yeah.

I'll take your word on it, since I did the temple-recommend-interview-thing. ^_^ I have no reason to think that you'd lie to me about it. :P

And, yes, I don't think that you and I will ever be boring. We're refreshingly insane, right? ^_^

Counting ...

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