California's Proposition 8 has recently captured the attention of our Nation. The campaigns for and against Proposition 8 raised $35.8 million and $37.6 million, respectively. The Proposition passed narrowly November 4th, 52% to 48%. The title of the ballot language was "Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry." Whether you agree with it or not, I believe the decision for the change was handled correctly. I believe this should be a state decision, as opposed to federal, and that the people should vote on it. Though I believe the process was correct, I don't agree with the decision of the majority.
The political disagreement that touches on both religion and human rights, has only intensified since the proposition passed. Reasons for support vary from restoring the definition of marriage (between a man and woman), protecting children from being taught about same-sex marriage in schools, and the social issues that come along with same-sex couples raising kids. The other major reason lurking behind the bedroom door, is outright homophobia. I'm sure this plays out in many different ways in many peoples minds.
I find most religious people express the definition of marriage as being between a man and woman. So religion and past societal norms play into these positions. This definition may be fine for some but it is certainly not for others. To the religious issue, the constitution provides for the separation of church and state and the right of individuals to pursue happiness as long as they are not harming others. Relative to societal norms, from 1850 until it was overturned 1948, the law for marriage was defined as "all marriages of white persons with negroes or mulattoes [were] declared to be illegal and void". “Slavery" was a “societal norm” and I think we can all agree these laws were wrong and against what America stands for. There is nothing in the constitution that limits any group freedoms.
Most proponents of Prop 8 say this is not an attack on gay lifestyles, you can call it a "civil agreement" or anything but marriage. Legally, the definition of marriage provides more rights for the couple. For marriage, there are over 1,049 federal and state benefits compared to only 300 state level benefits for civil unions. These benefits range from tax relief to medical decisions to death benefits. Again, there's a difference in equality in the two definitions.
So here in the United States we revel in our acceptance of diversity and the integration of all of the different cultures in our great country yet seem to stumble here.
When I saw a commercial saying if you don't vote yes for Prop 8, our kids will be taught about same-sex marriage in schools, I thought to myself "Doesn't sound like something I want taught to my kids." Marriage should be taught in my house period. The California Education Code Section 51890 states-
(a) For the purposes of this chapter, "comprehensive health education programs" are defined as all educational programs offered in kindergarten and grades 1 to 12, inclusive, in the public school system, including in-class and out-of-class activities designed to ensure that:
(1) Pupils will receive instruction to aid them in making decisions in matters of personal, family, and community health, to include the following subjects:
(A) The use of health care services and products. (B) Mental and emotional health and development. (C) Drug use and misuse, including the misuse of tobacco and alcohol. (D) Family health and child development, including the legal and financial aspects and responsibilities of marriage and parenthood. (E) Oral health, vision, and hearing. (F) Nutrition, which may include related topics such as obesity and diabetes.
Frankly I have to wonder what the public school system is doing leaving it to thousands of teachers to decide how to explain “the responsibilities of marriage and parenthood” in the first place. I think every teacher can interpret this or any other article in their own way and this should be removed regardless of which side of the issue you’re on. This code does not state “same-sex marriage” will be taught in schools and Prop 8 has no mention of schools in the legislation.
I realize most of our culture centers around generalizations- who the bad drivers are, who the bad dancers are, who has larger feet, etc. There are actually facts to back up a lot of the generalizations but at the end of the day, they're still generalizations. You may think it's wrong for two men to raise a child because the chances of that child having a social disorder are higher. There are good parents and there are not so good parents regardless of their sexual orientation. I would venture to say most parents need to worry about how they're going to raise their kids better instead of someone else's. Basing laws on generalizations is a dangerous road we don't want to go down.
We should not be changing the constitution to take rights away from anyone. Though you may not agree with how someone chooses to live their lives, we're all Americans and we're all free. Leave religion and definitions out of the debate. Agree or disagree, marriage is a right for everyone.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
No civilization in history has every allowed gay marriage. But I guess we're America and we know better than every civilization that ever lived. Just like we knew what we're doing with mortgage backed securities, social security, TARP, and every other government program.
Oh yeah, and you can't take a right away from someone that they never had in the first place. Do you really think the fore-fathers while writing the constitution had gay marriage on their minds? No right was ever given about this. Marriage is an institution created by the Church, it is purely a religious ceremony. The government should have never got involved with giving benefits to married couples. This is just another example of once the government gets involved with something they screw it up.
This is not about taking away rights from someone. This is about destroying another item that Christians hold dear. That is what the left is trying to do. Can't you people see this! The left will not stop until Christianity no longer exists. They just conned everyone to believe that we're trying to take away rights from people. Don't fall for it. They can have every tax break or custody right they want. But don't make a mockery of marriage.
America is already heading in the left direction. It's only a matter of about 15 years until every state adopts gay marriage. This is because almost everyone in my generation (I'm 28) goes to college. And college has brain-washed 95% of my generation. And as you can see, they have even turned some republicans into people who lean left, and they don't even realize it. It's sad what this country is coming to.
America, the last great hope is no more.
BZ
BZ-
Seriously! People have been having marriage ceremonies long before Christianity. And since when do you think that gays want to be married in your church? Newsflash- THEY DON"T. Churches need to stay out of this issue or they should be taxed if they are involved in politics. That is not what religion is all about. I don't know about you, but my church is the oldest Christianity churche out there and they have not said a word on this issue and that is how it should stay. It is all about Equality- bottom line and Christians should take a step back and realize it. You don't know what Christianity is if it hit you in the face.
Celestino
While I do recognize that marriage is a religious union, it is also a social, spiritual, and legal one as well. The word "Marriage" is a word that is used to define all of the unions stated above and not just the ones consummated in a church. I don't think that this is any attempt to squash Christianity but more an attempt to recognize that people should always have the right to emotionally join with whomever they want be it opposite sex or same. To me a gay person getting married is no more against religion than a straight person getting married that has no religious beliefs. I would actualy argue to say that if "marriage" is being fought for on religious grounds, that a gay person that worships is more qualified for that sanctity than the others who don't. I don't believe that this has to be a church issue...if you don't want to recognize gay marriage in church...then don't. Who am I to tell someone that is connected emotionally to another what they can and can't do just because that person happens to be the same sex.
When it comes to just not recognizing gay marriage in church...it doesn't work. Once it is law government can force churches to recognize this. Again this is big brother at work. I feel like I'm wasting my time here, my generation is brain-washed beyond repair, you guys will have your way on this issue soon enough.
If you choose to believe that the Bible in your words is " Living breathing document my ass", that's your right and I won't criticize you for it.
Why does the left always have to mud sling in their arguments. Why can't we just have a debate without liberals degrading the other side. I thought they were the "tolerant" ones. What a contradiction.
Just like they believe that a 15 year old girl should be able to rip a baby out of her body without contacting her parents, yet we won't even allow someone under 17 to see a rated "R" movie without parental consent.
Or how about if a pregnant woman is killed, the murderer is charged with the murder of both the mother and the unborn child. Yet abortion is not murder.
Now when it comes to Bible believing people, it is a contradiction to support gay marriage. I don't think anyone can argue that the Bible is against Sodomy. Isn't the support of gay marriage the support of Sodomy??? Sure is. Christians who believe they can pick and choose which places of the Bible to follow are living a lie.
I don't think anyone would argue that America is currently heading in the wrong direction. Is it a coincidence that America at the same time is heading farther and farther left. I don't believe this is a coincidence. The Democratic party used to be a party that was competant. Now they want to completely change how America was founded. The forefathers wanted a small government, with power to the people. The Democrates now want all the power with the government. Big mistake.
Whether I like it or not, we are heading more left, and unfortunately, liberals will just become more and more angry at life. We have nobody to blame but ourselves. The "it's not what your country can do for you, but what can you do for your country" is gone. Obama got elected on "it's not what you can do for your country, its what can your country do for you." People have lost their own dignity, to take care of themselves. What happened to personal responsibility?
We're in trouble....... Good luck to everyone.
z-man, I agree with you completely that we are moving further and further to the left and it is disturbing for many reasons, some of which you've listed. I do believe that this, like everything else with the government, could open up yet another slippery slope. On a social level it's not something I'm incredibly comfortable with myself but like many other issues, just because I wouldn't doesn't mean others shouldn't. So like every other possible slippery slope the conservatives will be tasked with the ever painful task of allowing personal liberties without interfering with liberties of those on the oposite side of the issue. Throughout history these types of freedoms have met the same types of fears and opposition. Black people never used to be able to worship god and now it's perfectly acceptable and not given a 2nd thought. And while there have been a fair share of "slippery slopes" unleashed with affirmative action, I don't believe that the negatives have outweighed the positives of the granting of personal liberty. I have lost all confidence in my government and have no doubt they'll run this one far past it's initial intention. The responsibilty falls on the right to get their faces out of the liberal trough and get back to the core values that provide the necessary balance in these types of issues. For the record, my name references the constitution not the bible and is my screen name for this blog site.
Proposition 8 is a legislative matter concerning a ruling by the Calif. Supreme Court and did not belong as a matter to be decided by the popular vote.
It faces serious legal challenges after November 4th (Election Day). My hope is that those legal arguments will win out in the end.
Whether or not we are ourselves are advocates for gay marriage, we simply can't allow for the erosion of civil liberties in our state, nor in any state of this country.
Prop 8 is discriminatory against a class of persons (a minority) whose rights should be protected under the Equal Protection clause of our Constitution; this Prop. has been fueled by the religious right in a kind of "conservative backlash" against "liberals" (including the LGTB community). Lately, it has become a nationwide controversy which will not end -- until the legal battle plays out.
Support the struggle for human rights -- your rights may be the next to go!!
Just my bit here but what is currently called MARRIAGE, should be a state enforced CONTRACT called Civil Union. Very simple, the state can't discriminate if the Civil Union just happens to be between two people of the same sex or Male/Female.
This would simplify things so much!
and it would get the state out of the business of enforcing RELIGIOUS concepts.
Anyhow, WHY are we spending so much time on this?
This nation has SERIOUS problems!
Our So-called Leaders refuse to be accountable under the LAW for anything and WE THE PEOPLE just
acquiesce to the shredding of the CONSTITUTION, what is going on around here?
You're spot on with this blog, Shea. The whole issue is kind of getting beat to death, and its really just a matter of time before we grow out of the emotional and irrational arguments similar to the ones that were raised against women voting or interracial marriage.
If you want to get really technical, a "traditional" marriage has been illegal in California since the 19th Century because in a "traditional" marriage the bride is only 13 and only the consent of the bride's father is needed, and its OK to have multiple wives.
If we really are the first society in the history of civilization to extend equal legal rights to homosexuals then good for us.
YES KEEP CHURCH AND COUNTRY SEPARATE-
“I believe in equal rights for all people, but marriage is not a legal union to provide equal rights to individuals. Marriage is a celestial union. The parameters of this union were not originally created nor outlined by any supreme court or any legal body or entity. It has been adopted by these entities to define the "norm" of the legal union of 2 people. They don't have the right nor the authority to change what they did not create. If we, as a country, want to keep church and country separate and keep god out of law, then let's make sure that we don't allow the law to change godly things such as marriage in order to provide "equal rights". ”
Autumn
I would tend to disagree with you on the fact this was handled correctly and I fully support the decision of the majority. The underlying issue with this proposition was it violated the Constitution no matter which way you voted.
If you voted for 8, you were limiting people’s freedom and discriminating. However voting against it removed the separation of church and state. The reason being, if prop 8 were not passed and a sue happy person were to walk into a church that obviously for religious reasons did not agree with this marriage and in good conscious could not perform the ceremony. That church could be sued, lose their tax exempt status, and fined by the government which goes to the very root of what the main principle this country was founded on which is freedom of religion. As far as the school issue. It would prevent parents from deciding how to handle marriage and issues such as these with there own children. The courses would be mandatory in high school and against our religion would not be a viable answer.
As a Christian I do not agree with homosexual marriage. However that is their business and not mine. My concerns about these laws were for our freedoms and rights. Just as I agree it is a violation of their individual freedoms to be limited in marrying who they want.
This law should have been left at the individual right for people to marry who they want and left there. But it wasn't. It opened the door to give our government the right to violate constitutionally protected rights no matter which way the vote went and gave the government a precedence to violate such rights in the future. This whole proposition was a bad seen with no winning side for California.
Post a Comment