*****
Society (Modern American Society) gets to define marriage for itself.
The best way we have of determining the will of the people is with a vote. 100% of society probably won't agree on much, so we have to go with a majority vote.
The traditional definition society has given marriage specifies it is a union between one man and one woman. Historically, groups have come to society seeking to expand the definition. Some have had their request shot down (LDS Polygamy, 1800's), some granted (interracial marriages), depending on whether the request was made at a point in time when the majority was prepared for the change.
When asking society if it is ready to change, it is important to ask the question correctly. If Prop 8 asked "Do you agree that the definition of marriage is one man and one woman?" it would be stupid to say anything but YES! Marriage has always been one man and one woman. In order find out if society is ready to expand the definition, one must ask "Is that all? Can marriage include same-sex partners?" Then people have to think, can I expand my definition that way? An individual has the right to vote in accordance to their hope, tradition, religious doctrine, personal preference, or even eeny meeny miny moe.
For the record, Prop 8 summary reads as follows:
ELIMINATES RIGHT OF SAME–SEX COUPLES TO MARRY. INITIATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
- Changes the California Constitution to eliminate the right of same-sex couples to marry in California.
- Provides that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.
to place the needs of another above our own, one that is not necessarily confined to opposing plumbing.
I think the arguments about how it will be taught in school or the example it sets for the children is APPALLINGLY RIDICULOUS RHETORIC. I would an hundred times over have my kids taught that love is good than taught that we don't like people who are different. Ye shall know them by their fruits ... the fruits of Prop 8 have been hateful judgement from BOTH sides. My children will be taught, by word and deed, to keep their appetites within the bounds the Lord has set (marriage to a partner of the opposite sex) yet they will be free to choose and I will always love them.
I define marriage by the emotion and the commitment. The thing Hollywood celebs do, it is not marriage, it is publicity. A MARRIAGE doesn't end; you make the vows and abide forever. People in a relationship just like marriage, who desire to call the relationship identical to marriage, marriage ... I can not reconcile in my mind why not. Because God said so ... I'll burn forever in hell (or where ever stupid, stubborn people go after they die) but I don't quite get it.
I get that sex is intended for man and woman to procreate, but it's not JUST for procreation, it's fun, too. I'm not sure which is the primary purpose, the procreation or the fun. Both serve to draw (and quarter) me closer to my husband. If I was unable to have children, would sex be a sin? Nope, cuz we are married. So, if gay people get married ...BUT BUT BUT God said...
God said a lot of things are abominations. Do you eat bacon? Do you "let" your woman wear pants? Last week I put a pink headband on my husband to hold the Xbox headset to his head ... that's an abomination!
But the PROPHET SAID... one prophet said study it out and pray. I have studied and I have prayed ... God did not tell me gay marriage was good and right. But I'm still shaky on the whys and why nots, I'm still looking for answers, really looking hard to understand.
Allaya, go back and read the Bible (I also recommend Stranger In A Strange Land), ... Love God and Love one another. Can it be that simple? Can't it just be that simple?
I think so.
Jesus wouldn't lie.
4 Brilliant Bits of Inspiration:
It might take 50 or maybe 150, but someday, I bet this won't be an issue.
You bring up a good point about the whole "abomination" issue. People are very selective about what Bible verses they choose and even what morality those verses illustrate. I mean, when Lot offers his daughters to be raped by the mob, is that really such a moral thing to do? And Leviticus states men should not sleep with men after the command to not look at a naked woman during her period, but we don't send women away from the community during their "unclean" time anymore, and that didn't destroy the world. Also, parts of the Bible are supportive of LOVE between members of the same sex, as in the case of Jonathan and David. Their relationship is depicted from a very sympathetic perspective.
It seems to me that the majority of the "abomination" is really about lust, which objectifies and dehumanizes, regardless of whether that lust is directed toward man, woman, vegetable, animal, or mineral (ok, not so much on the vegetable part). Those "abomination" passages are not about love and commitment.
50 or 150 years (that is).
For the record, that pink headband was an abomination.
Husband - i totally wanted to use the pics you deleted for this post, of you in the head band - the newest post has Sagan with the same headband ... maybe with a little time and photoshop I could fashion something ...
Post a Comment