On Prop 8 and other things related
I busted this out tonight. I had to get it off my chest. I want to go back and cite some of my sources, since obviously there are a few places I made claims based on outside sources and I don't always specify which ones. Some I won't be able to so easily because they are things from lectures in classes, or talks I've attended, or sometimes snippets of conversations (and in those cases, I allow for the fact I may or may not be correct). Mostly, I have just been totally furious with what has gone on in the whole Yes on Prop 8 thing, and I'm tired of being silent. So keep in mind that while yes I'm laying out my opinions to support a certain point of view, it's also for my benefit because I'm going absolutely nuts over this.
I'm angry.
Furious, actually.
I understand that people come at issues from different standpoints. It's only logical that what I think differs from what you might think. It all depends on what we're exposed to, how we grew up, what we're aware of and not aware of. In anthropological terms, we come from different cultures; henceforth, there are some things we may never agree on. From that perspective, I try to be culturally relative and appreciate that aspect of conflicts. However that doesn't mean I'm going to agree with you. Especially when it comes to Proposition 8.
Let's first go over what the proposition is. I quote from ballotpedia.org:
"Proposition 8, also known as the Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act, will appear on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was previously titled the Protect Marriage Act. It has also been known as the Same-Sex Marriage Ban or the Limit on Marriage Amendment. If it passes, it will add a new constitutional amendment to the California Constitution that will have the following text: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The ballot title for the measure says that Prop. 8 "eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry"."
Why am I against this? Firstly, why are people FOR it? Let's go back to ballotpedia.org to look at some key taglines people have been using to support the proposition:
1) "Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it's not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn't take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships."
First of all, bullshit it isn't an attack on the gay lifestyle. "…doesn't take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships." Right, so back in the Civil Rights movement, when segregation was still practiced, should we not have strove for equality?
Just because it doesn't take away those supposed "rights" doesn't mean it's all fine and dandy. It's STILL this supposed separate but equal bullcrap. Not even equal. Good god.
2) Prop. 8 "restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be."
Uh… restores? There was nothing in the constitution about this to begin with. In addition, "vast majority of voters?" I think the polls have wavered somewhat on this issue, and even then from my recollection it hasn't been a "vast majority." On top of that, if it WERE true, why the fuck would that justify this attack on civil rights? Why should we be okay with that? Why were we okay with slavery for so many years? Oh, and this "human history" bullshit. I want to see documentation on that. I want documentation that says collectively humans have understood marriage in the first place throughout all cultures. Western Christian culture isn't going to cut it, folks. While our society may be largely based upon Judeo-Christian values, I find it terribly ethnocentric that we can say "human history" has understood marriage.
3) It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people."
It occurs to me that you seem pretty sure that everyone (or at least almost everyone) agrees with you. I think I heard once that historically, the Supreme Court is woefully behind the times with its decisions. I don't know if that applies to the state Supreme Courts as well, but it's interesting to think that maybe, hey, the people really were ready for this, but it's just that the most vocal group got their panties in a bunch and decided to throw a tantrum, cause that's what the most vocal groups do. Maybe there are a bunch of people who don't mind gay people marrying; they're just not quite as loud.
4) "It protects our children from being taught in public schools that "same-sex marriage" is the same as traditional marriage
Okay, I'm sorry, this is a big fat lie. There is nothing in this proposition that says whether or not kids will be taught this. Read it, people. Just because Massachusetts started teaching kids about it three years after gay marriage was legalized doesn't mean public schools here will do that as well. Besides, you wouldn't let us, so why the fuck are you worried about that, when it's not the issue at hand?
Alright, so clearly some don't want gays to be able to marry. Why not? There must be some moral issue around homosexuality, which I will address a bit later, or it might be because of the spoon fed fear the ads for Yes on 8 are offering up on a silver platter. Like the whole teaching kids about gay couples (oooh, scary) another little detail they add is churches being forced to perform gay weddings. I refer to Stopprop8.org:
"Backers of Prop 8 say that current law forces religious institutions to perform gay marriages even if they object. This is not true. No religious institution is compelled by current law to do anything. The law defines marriage as a civil act."
Thank you, enough said.
Alrighty. Now, what's the big deal with the whole gay thing? There's all this political hoo-haw, but clearly the issue for many is the moral issue: in that some people (as they've made perfectly clear) do not agree with homosexuality. They condemn it, even. Mostly this either seems to stream from hillbillies who don't know anything past their own front porch or some varieties of Judeo-Christian belief (I will be very clear here and say I am not generalizing when I talk about the religious issue; in Christianity alone there are disagreements on whether or not homosexuality is a sin, which I will talk about as well); stereotypically, the fundamentalist or conservative brands of Christianity.
Why is this such an issue? What is it in their set of beliefs that condemns two people of the same sex loving each other and marrying? According to some there are a handful of passages in the Bible that condemn homosexuality (and let's not even begin to go into the whole "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" thing). In addition, I've heard people tie the morality of being gay to other things like murder and stealing (I assume this correlation is talking about if what our laws say are morally right or wrong stem from Bible verses; an argument about whether or not how you vote/the law is religiously influenced and if that in itself is moral or not. Aka, separation of church and state.). Now, this argument alone totally mystifies me. How you can tie something like murder to something like loving another person is utterly ridiculous in my opinion. However, they bring it up, so I'm going to address it. I've heard people say that if laws shouldn't be based on religious morals, then you have to throw out murder, stealing, etc. These, after all, stem from religion (at least in our Western culture). However I would like to point out that one of the key passages used to condemn homosexuality also says we shouldn't touch pigskin (therefore it is immoral to play football), we shouldn't eat shellfish (whoops), it's okay to sell your daughters (at least I think that's in there), and slavery is no big deal (uh…).
So, if we're going to toss up murder and theft, we probably ought to include all the other rules.
Do you know how many there are?
A lot. Do we subscribe to all of them? Hell no. Our society wouldn't be possible if we followed all of them. Of course, some like to say that "some of them are allegory and metaphor."
Oh really. Sooo in that case, who are you to say which ones are and which ones aren't? Le gasp, dare I suggest that MOST of what's in the Bible is metaphor, allegory, and dare I say, culturally relative?
That's right. Maybe a bunch of those rules were created and written down because they were important for the time, and for the people. But no longer! I don't think we have to worry about sex for pro-creation. We're already overpopulated as it is.
Of course, I'm coming at this from a perspective of reading the Bible in a certain way. If you subscribe to the belief that the Bible is the literal word of God, then you might have a little more trouble swallowing what I'm saying. But then again, if it's the literal word of God… maybe we should have slaves. Maybe that whole Civil War shouldn't have happened. Maaaybe we should add an amendment to the constitution that says eating shellfish is illegal.
Also, I'd like to point out that murder and theft are in the 10 Commandments. And last time I checked "Don't be gay" or "Don't you DARE sleep with someone with the same equipment as you" weren't in those 10.
Another thing about connecting murderers or people who steal to people who are gay; have you ever heard of the Exodus program? "Exodus International - freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ." There are quite a few people who think you can stop being gay (even if they're "wired" that way) through God. Like, I assume, people who go into therapy for stealing problems or inclinations to kill. Medication, other treatments, what have you.
You want to know what they do to correct homosexuality?
Electric shock treatment. Among other things. I don't know if Exodus uses electric shock, but it's one of the methods used for similar "correctional" programs.
You want to know the rate of success for programs like Exodus?
None.
Studies show that it does no good. None. In fact, the people probably leave even more fucked up and guilty than they were in the first place because not only are they still gay (or they're repressing it) but now they've failed God, Jesus Christ, and all their Christian brothers and sisters.
What does that kind of guilt and shame DO to someone?
For all you straight people, think of it from this perspective. If someone told you one day that God said it wrong to be straight, and everyone had to turn gay, do you think you could do it?
Could you?
Do you think you could go against something so fundamental in your very being?
One more thing. If we're wired to be a certain way, we're God's creation, and yet being attracted to someone is wrong… did God make a mistake?
At any rate, whether you agree or disagree with homosexuality, there is still the issue of whether or not that should affect the vote. I say not. Just because you're personal view of morals follows a certain set of beliefs does not mean you should deny the right of others who believe differently. It's not the same as murder, so stop tying it in with that. This is about civil rights. If you don't want a gay marriage, then don't get one. It's as simple as that. But don't deny other people the right to engage in a committed, trusting relationship called Marriage based upon your own personal values.
One last note. "Protect Marriage?" I'm pretty sure divorce is the primary threat to marriage, and honestly, what sanctity of marriage is left? Divorce rates are high. There isn't anything to protect when the concept is such a joke as it is. If anything gay marriage would help (at least for now). I know gay couples who are wonderfully committed. Being someone who is against marriage in general and doesn't want to get married, I find such hope and love in watching those people; more so than any single heterosexual couple I know.
Please take this into consideration. Your vote is your vote, and only you can make that decision. But I implore you to vote no on Prop 8. For someone you know.
I'm angry.
Furious, actually.
I understand that people come at issues from different standpoints. It's only logical that what I think differs from what you might think. It all depends on what we're exposed to, how we grew up, what we're aware of and not aware of. In anthropological terms, we come from different cultures; henceforth, there are some things we may never agree on. From that perspective, I try to be culturally relative and appreciate that aspect of conflicts. However that doesn't mean I'm going to agree with you. Especially when it comes to Proposition 8.
Let's first go over what the proposition is. I quote from ballotpedia.org:
"Proposition 8, also known as the Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Act, will appear on the November 2008 ballot in California. It was previously titled the Protect Marriage Act. It has also been known as the Same-Sex Marriage Ban or the Limit on Marriage Amendment. If it passes, it will add a new constitutional amendment to the California Constitution that will have the following text: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." The ballot title for the measure says that Prop. 8 "eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry"."
Why am I against this? Firstly, why are people FOR it? Let's go back to ballotpedia.org to look at some key taglines people have been using to support the proposition:
1) "Proposition 8 is about preserving marriage; it's not an attack on the gay lifestyle. Proposition 8 doesn't take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships."
First of all, bullshit it isn't an attack on the gay lifestyle. "…doesn't take away any rights or benefits of gay or lesbian domestic partnerships." Right, so back in the Civil Rights movement, when segregation was still practiced, should we not have strove for equality?
Just because it doesn't take away those supposed "rights" doesn't mean it's all fine and dandy. It's STILL this supposed separate but equal bullcrap. Not even equal. Good god.
2) Prop. 8 "restores the definition of marriage to what the vast majority of California voters already approved and human history has understood marriage to be."
Uh… restores? There was nothing in the constitution about this to begin with. In addition, "vast majority of voters?" I think the polls have wavered somewhat on this issue, and even then from my recollection it hasn't been a "vast majority." On top of that, if it WERE true, why the fuck would that justify this attack on civil rights? Why should we be okay with that? Why were we okay with slavery for so many years? Oh, and this "human history" bullshit. I want to see documentation on that. I want documentation that says collectively humans have understood marriage in the first place throughout all cultures. Western Christian culture isn't going to cut it, folks. While our society may be largely based upon Judeo-Christian values, I find it terribly ethnocentric that we can say "human history" has understood marriage.
3) It overturns the outrageous decision of four activist Supreme Court judges who ignored the will of the people."
It occurs to me that you seem pretty sure that everyone (or at least almost everyone) agrees with you. I think I heard once that historically, the Supreme Court is woefully behind the times with its decisions. I don't know if that applies to the state Supreme Courts as well, but it's interesting to think that maybe, hey, the people really were ready for this, but it's just that the most vocal group got their panties in a bunch and decided to throw a tantrum, cause that's what the most vocal groups do. Maybe there are a bunch of people who don't mind gay people marrying; they're just not quite as loud.
4) "It protects our children from being taught in public schools that "same-sex marriage" is the same as traditional marriage
Okay, I'm sorry, this is a big fat lie. There is nothing in this proposition that says whether or not kids will be taught this. Read it, people. Just because Massachusetts started teaching kids about it three years after gay marriage was legalized doesn't mean public schools here will do that as well. Besides, you wouldn't let us, so why the fuck are you worried about that, when it's not the issue at hand?
Alright, so clearly some don't want gays to be able to marry. Why not? There must be some moral issue around homosexuality, which I will address a bit later, or it might be because of the spoon fed fear the ads for Yes on 8 are offering up on a silver platter. Like the whole teaching kids about gay couples (oooh, scary) another little detail they add is churches being forced to perform gay weddings. I refer to Stopprop8.org:
"Backers of Prop 8 say that current law forces religious institutions to perform gay marriages even if they object. This is not true. No religious institution is compelled by current law to do anything. The law defines marriage as a civil act."
Thank you, enough said.
Alrighty. Now, what's the big deal with the whole gay thing? There's all this political hoo-haw, but clearly the issue for many is the moral issue: in that some people (as they've made perfectly clear) do not agree with homosexuality. They condemn it, even. Mostly this either seems to stream from hillbillies who don't know anything past their own front porch or some varieties of Judeo-Christian belief (I will be very clear here and say I am not generalizing when I talk about the religious issue; in Christianity alone there are disagreements on whether or not homosexuality is a sin, which I will talk about as well); stereotypically, the fundamentalist or conservative brands of Christianity.
Why is this such an issue? What is it in their set of beliefs that condemns two people of the same sex loving each other and marrying? According to some there are a handful of passages in the Bible that condemn homosexuality (and let's not even begin to go into the whole "Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve" thing). In addition, I've heard people tie the morality of being gay to other things like murder and stealing (I assume this correlation is talking about if what our laws say are morally right or wrong stem from Bible verses; an argument about whether or not how you vote/the law is religiously influenced and if that in itself is moral or not. Aka, separation of church and state.). Now, this argument alone totally mystifies me. How you can tie something like murder to something like loving another person is utterly ridiculous in my opinion. However, they bring it up, so I'm going to address it. I've heard people say that if laws shouldn't be based on religious morals, then you have to throw out murder, stealing, etc. These, after all, stem from religion (at least in our Western culture). However I would like to point out that one of the key passages used to condemn homosexuality also says we shouldn't touch pigskin (therefore it is immoral to play football), we shouldn't eat shellfish (whoops), it's okay to sell your daughters (at least I think that's in there), and slavery is no big deal (uh…).
So, if we're going to toss up murder and theft, we probably ought to include all the other rules.
Do you know how many there are?
A lot. Do we subscribe to all of them? Hell no. Our society wouldn't be possible if we followed all of them. Of course, some like to say that "some of them are allegory and metaphor."
Oh really. Sooo in that case, who are you to say which ones are and which ones aren't? Le gasp, dare I suggest that MOST of what's in the Bible is metaphor, allegory, and dare I say, culturally relative?
That's right. Maybe a bunch of those rules were created and written down because they were important for the time, and for the people. But no longer! I don't think we have to worry about sex for pro-creation. We're already overpopulated as it is.
Of course, I'm coming at this from a perspective of reading the Bible in a certain way. If you subscribe to the belief that the Bible is the literal word of God, then you might have a little more trouble swallowing what I'm saying. But then again, if it's the literal word of God… maybe we should have slaves. Maybe that whole Civil War shouldn't have happened. Maaaybe we should add an amendment to the constitution that says eating shellfish is illegal.
Also, I'd like to point out that murder and theft are in the 10 Commandments. And last time I checked "Don't be gay" or "Don't you DARE sleep with someone with the same equipment as you" weren't in those 10.
Another thing about connecting murderers or people who steal to people who are gay; have you ever heard of the Exodus program? "Exodus International - freedom from homosexuality through the power of Jesus Christ." There are quite a few people who think you can stop being gay (even if they're "wired" that way) through God. Like, I assume, people who go into therapy for stealing problems or inclinations to kill. Medication, other treatments, what have you.
You want to know what they do to correct homosexuality?
Electric shock treatment. Among other things. I don't know if Exodus uses electric shock, but it's one of the methods used for similar "correctional" programs.
You want to know the rate of success for programs like Exodus?
None.
Studies show that it does no good. None. In fact, the people probably leave even more fucked up and guilty than they were in the first place because not only are they still gay (or they're repressing it) but now they've failed God, Jesus Christ, and all their Christian brothers and sisters.
What does that kind of guilt and shame DO to someone?
For all you straight people, think of it from this perspective. If someone told you one day that God said it wrong to be straight, and everyone had to turn gay, do you think you could do it?
Could you?
Do you think you could go against something so fundamental in your very being?
One more thing. If we're wired to be a certain way, we're God's creation, and yet being attracted to someone is wrong… did God make a mistake?
At any rate, whether you agree or disagree with homosexuality, there is still the issue of whether or not that should affect the vote. I say not. Just because you're personal view of morals follows a certain set of beliefs does not mean you should deny the right of others who believe differently. It's not the same as murder, so stop tying it in with that. This is about civil rights. If you don't want a gay marriage, then don't get one. It's as simple as that. But don't deny other people the right to engage in a committed, trusting relationship called Marriage based upon your own personal values.
One last note. "Protect Marriage?" I'm pretty sure divorce is the primary threat to marriage, and honestly, what sanctity of marriage is left? Divorce rates are high. There isn't anything to protect when the concept is such a joke as it is. If anything gay marriage would help (at least for now). I know gay couples who are wonderfully committed. Being someone who is against marriage in general and doesn't want to get married, I find such hope and love in watching those people; more so than any single heterosexual couple I know.
Please take this into consideration. Your vote is your vote, and only you can make that decision. But I implore you to vote no on Prop 8. For someone you know.