Friday, August 08, 2003
Today I am going to get back up on my "intolerance bashing" soapbox. But I have been doing a lot of soulsearching and meditating on this so it is going to sound a bit odd for me.
Gay marriage. Episcopalians are considering including "Blessing Ceremonies" in their cannon. GW is trying to find a way to make it illegal without altering the constitution to do it. To me, from my perspective, this is completely bass-ackwards (to let my hillbilly roots show through momentarily).
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for gay marriage. I think it's an amazingly overdue, no-brainer of a thing that shouldn't even be an issue. Two people love each other and want to build a life and a hosehold together, of course they should be able to get married. Monogamy is a GOOD thing and should be encouraged! (sorry, not very pagan of me, I know, but I have a problem with promiscuity. Personal issues.)
But let's look at it from these two perspectives. Christianity. The majority of christian religions follow the teachings of some translation of the bible. And in the bible it does say that homosexuality is a sin. So if you believe that sort of thing then you have to also believe that gay marriage is a bad thing if you are going to be true to your faith. Which is also a good thing and to be encouraged. I don't agree with christianity on much of anything, particularly this. Personally, I don't know why anyone would want to be a christian in view of the fact that for the most part, in practice, christianity is just as much a hate group as the KKK or the White Aryan Resistance (fanatical fringe christian groups). And they can find support for all of their intolerance in the bible. At the same time, it is unreasonable to expect them to ignore the teachings of their faith just because the rest of the world thinks it's wrong. And to ask them to accept something that goes against this teaching and accept it into their church and their cannon is really not reasonable or right.
HOWEVER... The law of the land is another issue. In view of the
SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE gay marriage
SHOULD NOT even be an issue!!! Of course it should be allowed, sanctioned and encouraged!! If they want to preserve the family in America then let these families be recognized as well!! Heterosexual marriage
IS NOT the Ideal. Loving, stable relationships are the Ideal. Heterosexual parents aren't automatically the best role models for children. Parents who love each other and care for their children are the best role models. I have said this before and I will say it again, my parents were heterosexual and we would have been better off raised by wolves. And we are not in the minority. Considering the fact that gay couples cannot adopt, the majority of children in this country are in families with heterosexual parents. Look at the child abuse/neglect statistics in this country. It is appaling!!! And this is all done by heterosexual parents!!! You know what that says to me?? Either heterosexuals make
worse parents than homosexuals or
sexual preference has NOTHING to do with parenting ability!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you know what the profile of the average pedophile is?
White male HETEROSEXUAL!!!!!!! All the boy scout leaders, priests, sports coaches and other men in position of power who abuse children are either married to the church or married to women and have families!!!!!!!!
So, I think what I'm saying is, yes, gays should be able to get married and yes they should get all the benefits of marriage but we shouldn't force any churches to recognize the marriage. Whether or not a church recognizes a marriage is irrelevant in any case aside from the fact that it makes them feel better in their moral superiority. The important part is that the state and the country recognize it and that should be enforced by the law of the land. I feel sorry for those gays who wish to be christians and wish to be accepted into their churches and/or married in their churches. And if they feel like they want to change their individual churches or even their denomination, that should be left as an internal processes within that particular church/denomination. (Although in view of the obvious condemnation of their orientation in the bible I don't see how they could be or want to be a christian.) Or they could just come to any UU church and they would be welcomed with open arms.
But neither should any church or religious faction force the state not to recognize the union. If they want to be intolerant bigots, they need to keep that to themselves. Shut out and shun the gays if they want to. Disfellowship, excommunicate, get on your bus and travel around the country with signs saying "Gays Die and God Laughs". Whatever makes you feel good about yourself and your god. But keep it separate.
That, I think, is the definition of Separation of Church and State.
posted by Kimber
at 12:20 PM ::
~#~
Monday, August 04, 2003
No, I did
not in fact fall off the face of the earth. I'm still here just busy. But I was watching
The Practice last night and it got me thinking. They were talking about the death penalty. In this episode there was a 19 year old black man who was a drug dealer and in the process of attempting to kill a rival drug dealer, he killed an innocent bystander. Bad thing, yes. He went before a Judicial Committee to determine if the death penalty should be applied. After much argument and pleading and whatnot, the committee decided that the death penalty wasn't applicable in this case. After all of that, the Attourney General, our old friend John Ashcroft sends a letter saying that they are ignoring the recommendations of the committee and they are going to execute this kid anyway. Apparently this is common practice with him these days. Now I didn't know this and I haven't researched it yet but it doesn't in the least bit surprise me. The hypocracy of conservatives is one of my stumping boards and I think I will whack on it a little bit now.
WHY do they think that government shouldn't be allowed to regulate guns but they should be allowed to regulate marriage. WHY do they think that Right to Life means saving fetal tissue and executing living humans? WHY do they say that they want to move more responsibility down to the state level and then turn right around and usurp state's sovreignity whenever it suits their needs?
I don't agree with their agenda. I think they are all a bunch of evil, arrogant, elitist, bigots who want all the poor/disabled people to
die so they can save money on social programs. But for the love of Mike
AT LEAST they could be
CONSISTENT in their villany!!!!!!!!!!!
posted by Kimber
at 11:11 AM ::
~#~
