I've been somewhat AWOL from this journal, and for decidedly personal reasons. I'm going to express them here, but first, I feel the need to post a bit of a disclaimer
( Read more... )
I am not saying that Christianity is more important than any other religion. It is the faith that I follow and it is my belief system. This is why I choose not to engage in any discussion on the matter, since it tends to devolve into hair-splitting and that can get irritating.
Marriage to me is more than just a civil contract: within the Church it is also a spiritual commitment and a sacrament, which can be ratified only with the right form (ie. the marriage vows and the blessing of the priest/deacon acting as the official witness of the Church) and the right substance (ie. a man and a woman of sound mind who are fully aware of the level of responsibility that married life entails). Beyond that, I am generally not going to say anything about civil unions, etc.; given recent events, I felt the need to get certain matters off my chest that have been sitting there for some time.
My pain resulting from seeing a man I was getting interested in marry another man has nothing to do with civil rights or denying them to anyone. It has to do with a personal wound that is taking a while to heal, and unfortunately, a certain subject just reminds me of said wound, which then starts to hurt again. It may seem like a shallow reason, but for me, the one with that pain, it is a very valid reason to avoid discussing the subject at all, since it makes me feel like I'm even more outnumbered in trying to find a potential mate. I don't ask you or anyone else to agree with me or even affirm my thoughts and feelings on this matter. I only ask for a certain amount of respect and acceptance. I'm not the one on the street corner waving the anti-gay marriage signs, I'm the one quietly praying for a peaceful resolution to this matter and trying not to cry because the subject is so painful to even think about.
Marriage to me is more than just a civil contract: within the Church it is also a spiritual commitment and a sacrament, which can be ratified only with the right form (ie. the marriage vows and the blessing of the priest/deacon acting as the official witness of the Church) and the right substance (ie. a man and a woman of sound mind who are fully aware of the level of responsibility that married life entails)
That's nice and all, but it has nothing to do with United States law. I really don't care if the Catholic Church thinks I'm an icky sinner and won't let get married in the Church. I want my basic civil and legals rights, which in any country that is not a theocracy should never be affected by anyone's spiritual views. It shouldn't be a part of the issue.
Sure, a non-theocratic state should not be allowed to pass laws based on religious views, but as long as freedom of religion exists, an individual is entitled to hold certain views that are influenced by their personal religious beliefs.
But these beliefs should have no bearing on civil law. As I said, I'm Wiccan. Part of the Wiccan Crede that I follow forbids the burning of the elder tree. (Why? Because it the Lady's tree. It makes no less sense than hating gays.) How would I look if I started campaign to make a law against burning elder wood? I'd look stupid and entitled. Because I would be stupid and entitled. The only person who should be affected by my religious beliefs is me. If I try to force that on others, I've started to advocate prejudice.
Yes, they shouldn't, but nobody is completely free of their own beliefs, religious or otherwise - it's unrealistic to expect so - and these will come into play when voting for civil matters, or when considering what issues matter to them. It's not ideal, but it can't be helped short of letting the people have no say at all.
If you lived in a place with a large Wiccan population, and decided to pass a law against burning elder wood, it probably would become a valid issue and might get passed; because in a democracy, that's just how things work. It's a downside of the system because it basically supports the majority view, and sometimes religion does come unavoidably into play.
because in a democracy, that's just how things work
Oh my god so much no. That's called the tyranny of the majority. It's not a good thing. Alexis de Tocqueville, John Stuart Mills and James Madison wrote on it. In fact, to quote Madison, "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."
That is not "just how things work" in fact, Judge Walker ruled the way he did on Prop 8 in order to prevent this.
Oh, and just so you know, I would never try to pass a tree burning law, and if one did come to vote, I would vote against it. Because doing otherwise would be a really shitty thing to do.
Marriage to me is more than just a civil contract: within the Church it is also a spiritual commitment and a sacrament, which can be ratified only with the right form (ie. the marriage vows and the blessing of the priest/deacon acting as the official witness of the Church) and the right substance (ie. a man and a woman of sound mind who are fully aware of the level of responsibility that married life entails). Beyond that, I am generally not going to say anything about civil unions, etc.; given recent events, I felt the need to get certain matters off my chest that have been sitting there for some time.
My pain resulting from seeing a man I was getting interested in marry another man has nothing to do with civil rights or denying them to anyone. It has to do with a personal wound that is taking a while to heal, and unfortunately, a certain subject just reminds me of said wound, which then starts to hurt again. It may seem like a shallow reason, but for me, the one with that pain, it is a very valid reason to avoid discussing the subject at all, since it makes me feel like I'm even more outnumbered in trying to find a potential mate. I don't ask you or anyone else to agree with me or even affirm my thoughts and feelings on this matter. I only ask for a certain amount of respect and acceptance. I'm not the one on the street corner waving the anti-gay marriage signs, I'm the one quietly praying for a peaceful resolution to this matter and trying not to cry because the subject is so painful to even think about.
Reply
That's nice and all, but it has nothing to do with United States law. I really don't care if the Catholic Church thinks I'm an icky sinner and won't let get married in the Church. I want my basic civil and legals rights, which in any country that is not a theocracy should never be affected by anyone's spiritual views. It shouldn't be a part of the issue.
Reply
Reply
Reply
If you lived in a place with a large Wiccan population, and decided to pass a law against burning elder wood, it probably would become a valid issue and might get passed; because in a democracy, that's just how things work. It's a downside of the system because it basically supports the majority view, and sometimes religion does come unavoidably into play.
Reply
Oh my god so much no. That's called the tyranny of the majority. It's not a good thing. Alexis de Tocqueville, John Stuart Mills and James Madison wrote on it. In fact, to quote Madison, "It is of great importance in a republic not only to guard the society against the oppression of its rulers but to guard one part of the society against the injustice of the other part. If a majority be united by a common interest, the rights of the minority will be insecure."
That is not "just how things work" in fact, Judge Walker ruled the way he did on Prop 8 in order to prevent this.
Oh, and just so you know, I would never try to pass a tree burning law, and if one did come to vote, I would vote against it. Because doing otherwise would be a really shitty thing to do.
Reply
Leave a comment