so i'm really really tired but feel like i should do you the honor of responding to a couple of the points you made. i'm sorry it's taken me a while, and like i said, i'm probably too tired to really be let near a computer right now. i also don't really know how i feel about god, so that contributes also.
i take issue with the idea that just because you love someone, you automatically do whatever it is that they ask. that's not a real relationship. it's one of the reasons i find judaism so interesting because there is A LOT of arguing with god. real love means arguing but being there to help put back the pieces of a person when the argument has run its course. it doesn't mean uncritical acceptance. i also don't believe that god would want anyone to vote yes on prop 8 when love, if that is in fact what he/she/it is, should transcend the "sins" of the flesh. i believe and maintain that love is transcendent and holy in and of itself; real love, not lust, not infatuation, not emphemeral obsession, but pure love speaks to souls (if you believe in them) but at least to a common shared humanity. we all know real love when we see it, or hear it. when music grabs onto your heart and wrings it dry, it shouldn't matter in what breast that heart resides because that feeling and love is beautiful and holy in and of itself.
i also agree that just because someone identifies as a particular religion, it's no excuse to stereotype their opinions about things. that's not fair, i realize that.
and i believe strongly in democracy. so much so that i'd rather see direct democracy (but that's another livejournal comment...), but that engaging in the governmentally sanctioned democratic process is not enough and is, in fact, insufficiently revolutionary. there may have been more yes's at the polls, but why does that preclude protest? why does that require a subsuming of outrage at the threatening of a constitutional right? "moving on" does not mean accepting, number one, something unconstitutional, and number two, regardless of the constitution, does not mean that one can give up fighting. i can allude to all sorts of movements that challenged the ballot box and altered the course of american history for the better. progress need not be government sanctioned and outrage need not be quelled. it just needs to be constructively channeled and applied.
i take issue with the idea that just because you love someone, you automatically do whatever it is that they ask. that's not a real relationship. it's one of the reasons i find judaism so interesting because there is A LOT of arguing with god. real love means arguing but being there to help put back the pieces of a person when the argument has run its course. it doesn't mean uncritical acceptance. i also don't believe that god would want anyone to vote yes on prop 8 when love, if that is in fact what he/she/it is, should transcend the "sins" of the flesh. i believe and maintain that love is transcendent and holy in and of itself; real love, not lust, not infatuation, not emphemeral obsession, but pure love speaks to souls (if you believe in them) but at least to a common shared humanity. we all know real love when we see it, or hear it. when music grabs onto your heart and wrings it dry, it shouldn't matter in what breast that heart resides because that feeling and love is beautiful and holy in and of itself.
i also agree that just because someone identifies as a particular religion, it's no excuse to stereotype their opinions about things. that's not fair, i realize that.
and i believe strongly in democracy. so much so that i'd rather see direct democracy (but that's another livejournal comment...), but that engaging in the governmentally sanctioned democratic process is not enough and is, in fact, insufficiently revolutionary. there may have been more yes's at the polls, but why does that preclude protest? why does that require a subsuming of outrage at the threatening of a constitutional right? "moving on" does not mean accepting, number one, something unconstitutional, and number two, regardless of the constitution, does not mean that one can give up fighting. i can allude to all sorts of movements that challenged the ballot box and altered the course of american history for the better. progress need not be government sanctioned and outrage need not be quelled. it just needs to be constructively channeled and applied.
Reply
Leave a comment