I need to vent a little bit about the Defense of Marriage initiatives that are being voted on around the country this coming Tuesday. I have some very dear friends who are gay, and I love them; I cherish our friendships. I think—I hope—all my liberal friends have an understanding where we "pro-marriage" folks are coming from. Or at least where I and other informed conservatives are coming from.
Let me begin by saying that neither I nor anyone I know wishes to take away anyone’s pursuit of happiness. For me, defense of marriage is a simple legal and religious issue. I don’t think anyone should ever be discriminated against in the courts based on their sexual preference or the gender of the partner they’ve chosen to spend their lives with. Any law that specifies a spouse as next of kin or inheritor should be re-worded to mean partner. I believe that gay couples should have the same rights under the law that married couples have.
But I don’t believe gay marriage should be legal. I don’t even believe that such a thing exists. Why? Because marriage, by definition, is a sacrament. It is a three-way covenant between a man, woman, and God, and marks the establishment of a family unit. It doesn’t exist outside of religion, no matter what we have told ourselves over the past century. And yes, that goes for heterosexual couples, too. I don’t mean to offend, but that’s just what I believe. I have deep respect and admiration for any couple that commits to eachother and strives to build a life together, and I believe every union deserves protection under the law. But unless you have invited God into your union, it’s not a marriage by definition. I could go look up all the Milton and Luther quotes flying around my brain on this subject, but I’ll just leave my thoughts there.
I also worry, as many other religious people do, about the repercussions of legal gay marriage for churches who continue to abide by biblical standards. Will refusing to sanction such marriages result in legal action? If so, we are no longer free and church and state are no longer separated, and good-bye America.
Then, in California, there is the whole issue of legislating from the bench—creating a dictatorship of the court. It should never, ever be okay for the court to overturn legislation that has been voted upon by a majority of the people. WE THE PEOPLE rule this country, and we must defend our right to rule and not be dictated to by an elite few who think they know better than the majority of citizens.
All of these things can and should be done in a spirit of love and respect--two things I have seen very little of on either side.
9 comments:
Jamers I respectfully and sincerely disagree on this marriage thing. I believe that it's morally and ethically wrong to change the constitution to allow for legal discrimination. To me it's about equality and discrimination and also justifying people's fears and hatred of people who are different from themselves.
I guess differences of opinion make the world go round....right? I like hearing the other side of the argument and you are for sure my favorite conservative and always very thoughtful and logical so thanks for helping me see your POV even if I disagree.
hugs,
Susan
I think you said it really well. I totally agree.
My mom is quitting her teacher's union over this because they are spending tons of money to campaign FOR gay marriage in the Arizona election.
Oklahoma is so pro-heterosexuality that I don't think we'll have a vote like that here anytime soon.
Sue--thanks for your kind response.I have just heard some hateful things from both sides of the argument and I just wanted people to know that for most of us the issue has nothing to do with our feelings about homosexuality--it has to do with protecting religion and the voice of the majority--that pesky democracy thing. I TOTALLY get where you and other no-on-8 people are coming from, but to me, it's just not that simple.
Becky--GO Sister Oliver! Wow. Hey, speaking of you and your family, you should go check out Michael Gregg's post about his conversion at his blog. It's really sweet.
Hey Jamie. Thanks for leaving a comment on my blog! It is amazing how many people Nie Nie as affected for good. I think about her everyday and I have never met her.... Maybe one day? But then she is famous so she may have too many people wanting to meet her and tell her thanks. Matt and Amie are sooo much fun! Matt, my husband, and I sure miss them and we do need to come to Montana and visit them. So you live there too? I have been to Montana many times... so beautiful!
I can imagine Joe Biden explaining how he and Barack can solve this problem, "with three letters LOVE".
wink ; wink ;
Jamie, I love you. Thank you for so beautifully portraying what so many of us are feeling at this difficult time. I am also tired of the anger and lies that people are attaching to this issue. This anger poisons people and relationships and is so sad to see. I am a Constitutionalist and I believe that the Rights of the Californians were horribly violated by what the judges did taking the power from the people.
Jamie...YOU ARE AMAZING! Ric & I have many gay friends as well. But you said it perfect! It is a sacrament. We too love our gay friends and hope they understand. Amazingly...many we know say they dont want to be married.
Very well said, Jamie. I have to disagree with the judges issue, though. The judges' job is to determine constitutionality of a law. In many people's opinion, CA judges interpreted the constitution wrongly when they overturned the "people's vote", but anytime the people's vote put into a law one whose constitutionality is questioned, the judges' decision is based on their interpretation of the constitution, not on the law's popularity. That is why the constitution must be amended, so that there is no question about interpretation.
Thanks for the correction, Hil...I understand that better now after looking closer at Prop.8. I wish they'd done 22 right, but hopefully an amendment will solve the problem. Who knew 13 years ago when the Proclamation came out that we'd really be fighting this hard to defend families?
Post a Comment