On Tuesday, November 4th, one minority group was achieving a new level of equality in the U.S. with President-Elect Obama’s victory, while another was seeing their rights taken away with the passage of proposition 8 in California.
For too long those that sit in ivory towers and who have claimed to know God’s mind, (as if that were possible), have tried to hold a monopoly on what is within God’s grace and what is not. For too long these “elders” have decided that the Old Testament is much more important then the New Testament, even though Christ said that it wasn’t.
Who ever you are tonight, if you feel like your God is calling you to pick a side, just remember that God let a prostitute wash his feet and honored her above all of his disciples, and remember that Christ once said, “Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you.” What do you think that means, exactly? Does that only apply if the person is a Christian?
I shouldn’t have to remind anyone that the reason to protect the separation between church and state isn’t to preserve the government, but actually to preserve religion. Remember when you start pushing your brand of Christianity on those that don’t believe the same way you do, that someone could just as easily do the same to you if their religion was the stronger religion in the U.S. Don’t think that could happen? Just ask the major financial supporter behind prop. 8, the Mormon church. I’m sure they’ve never had a problem with government and religious fanatics persecuting them. The hypocrisy is astounding. A religion that advocated polygamy and child brides, is now up in arms about two committed U.S. citizens that want to share in the same promises of life long love, that the rest of us take for granted.
At its heart, and to be brutally honest, this isn’t about heaven or hell, it never has been. It’s about love or hate. Everyone should be allowed to share in the same opportunities in this country. We are the U.S. for heavens sake. You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to condone it, and you don’t have to be friends with them, just don’t stand in the way of their happiness, just because you can’t get past your distrust of something you or I may not understand.
Loading ...
13 responses so far ↓
1 Duke // Nov 13, 2008 at 9:32 am
Great post, bud. I think the deal with prop 8 was this: no one really knew what they were voting on. It didn’t have anything to do with marriage, gayness, or anything that everyone keeps talking about. It was about individual rights and the freedom to choose. It must have been about that because I find it hard to believe that the same group of people who voted to elect Obama voted to take this right away from those who already had it.
Duke
2 sarah // Nov 14, 2008 at 10:52 am
You were right. I cried.
3 D // Nov 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm
People need to get over their own fears. I’ve always said that if you don’t like gay marriage, don’t marry someone of the same sex. Problem solved. Now let those who do want to marry go forth and do so.
4 Lance // Nov 14, 2008 at 4:05 pm
It does seem to take time for this country to embrace “different”, sad as that may be.
I worked hard for Obama, always in the back of my mind, I wondered, will he be able to win this. He is more than ready, smart, articulate, good speaker, you do understand what he is saying. But will the United States embrace a person of color as the President. Look at how long that took for the United States. Lets hope that Prop.8 and such does not take that long.
If a person is disabled in this country, look at how long it took for them to be able to go up a set of stairs at a federal building. I suppose what I am saying is, Patience….
5 Jerame // Nov 14, 2008 at 5:20 pm
Sarah-The reason I knew you would, is because I almost did, and I never cry.
D-You said it! Couldn’t agree with you more.
Lance-Thanks for your constant encouragement. I have to admit that I too wondered if the country would embrace a President Obama the way I was ready to. I had a leg up on most of America, however, as my family is multi-racial.
Thanks again everyone for your great comments. Keep them coming.
6 Political Disgust // Nov 18, 2008 at 7:12 pm
First off, there are few things more entertaining then just about anytime Keith O. talks these days. He is literally becoming almost a cartoon character of …. himself. The recent SNL skit was a classic.
Next, it is just crazy to me that in this day and age ANYONE can have a problem with gay men and women is beyond me. Who cares. Let me say it again. Who Cares. Let them live their lives how they want and it does not effect you at all.
—
Political Disgust
http://www.politicaldisgust.com
7 CW // Nov 19, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Jerame,
True, the Old Testament is not more important than the New Testament, Romans 1:26-27, 1Corinthians 6:9-11, 1Timothy 1:10, and Jude 1:7-8 are all New Testament verses that talk about Homosexuality. I don’t think that homosexuals care what the Bible has to say about the lifestyle they choose to live. They either don’t know what God said about homosexuality or they don’t care what he said about it. Or maybe they don’t believe in a God at all. Marriage was invented by God not by the US of A. It has been one way and one way only since Adam and Eve. To redefine marriage to mean something other than “one man and one women for as long as they both shall live” is wrong.
Now with that being said, what rights should homosexuals have in this free society? They want the right to combined incomes and estates and taxes and households and their lives. They also want to celebrate their commitment to one another and their love. I believe they can do all of those things without being “married”. A Power of Attorney, Last Will and Testament, Civil Unions, and Advanced Directives will ensure that gays and lesbians will have rights to each others estates and insurance and visitation in a hospital setting. They can have commitment ceremonies and receptions to celebrate their relationships. There are some instances where you can’t have your cake and eat it too. I believe this is one of those cases. It’s is just something that they have to give up inorder to live the life that they perfer. It’s like giving up on the idea that two women or two men could ever have a biological child together. Someday California and the whole USA may allow “Gay Marriage” but can we really fool the inventor?
CW
8 Jerame // Nov 19, 2008 at 5:19 pm
That was a well worded response CW, and to be honest, I agree spiritually with you. I am a Christian. That being said, the only reason that the government recognizes marriages of anyone is for legal purposes of dividing land and assets, to solve custody disputes, and of course, to make money off of the licenses.
I honestly don’t care what another couple, gay or straight do, because it doesn’t affect me in any way. If people are worried that their children will “become” gay from learning about gays that are married, and if they believe that homosexuality is a choice rather than a biologically determined thing, then they can teach their kids what they want them to think.
It just seems selfish and arrogant to use the constitution, a secular document, to deny a minority of individuals a right that the rest of us take for granted. To each their own, live and let live, and do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
If we want our marriages to truly mean something, we shouldn’t allow government to decide what is marriage anyway. Marriage, the way that you and I think of it, is between the couple and THEIR God, not necessarily between them and MY God. That is the point that needs to be understood. Marriage should be a religious issue, but instead we have made it into a government issue. There is no secular reason why this shouldn’t be allowed. There is no scientific proof that a homosexual couple is less stable than a heterosexual couple, and with divorce rates hovering in the 50 percentile, you’d think that our society would be trying to promote marriage, not telling a whole group of U.S. citizens that they aren’t good enough to be married.
Just as the idea of separate but equal was struck down as inherently unequal in regards to schools for minorities, the idea that a commitment ceremony, or a civil union would ever be the same as a marriage is preposterous.
Anyway, CW, thanks for your comments. They were even tempered and well thought out. I believe that you are following your conscious. We’ll have to just agree to disagree. Have a great day.
9 Political Disgust // Nov 19, 2008 at 5:25 pm
That is always the point and question.
Is marriage a religious union OR a government union. You CAN NOT legally get married in the USA without a government issues license. So that means that marriage is a taxable law regulated business proposition. When you get divorced is it GOD that divides up your assets and bank account? Of course not.
So since marriage is not a religious thing then there should be NO REASON to not allow gay men and women to get married in my opinion.
—
Political Disgust
10 Jerame // Nov 19, 2008 at 5:32 pm
Thanks for your comment PD. You wrote in 3 paragraphs what it took me much longer to write. Thanks.
11 CW // Nov 20, 2008 at 2:13 pm
I don’t know guys, it’s a slippery slope. Who decides which alternative lifestyles are allowed to wed and which are not? Things that may seem crazy to you and I, are what others choose to do. Polygamy, marrying the deceased, marrying animals, or even children all are very outrageous ideas, I know. But some people would claim that it’s normal for them. 100 years ago the idea of two men or two women getting married was also outrageous. Someone wrote that since marriage is not a religious contract but a legal one that the government doesn’t have the right to deny marriage to anyone. But who is the government? Isn’t it “governed by the people and for the people”?
Then, there is the thought of Gods blessing. I believe that God has blessed America. How else would one explain the achievements of this great nation? Together we have more and have achieved more in two hundred years then some civilizations achieve in ten times that many years. I believe this is because we are founded on goodness and righousness that is outlined in traditional Judeo-Christian values. “Blessed are those who hear the word of God, and observe it.” Luke 11:28
I know my ideas will not make me popular with your typical blog readers, but a lot of people share my opinion. Looks like some of them live in California.
I’m all for coexsiting. Compromise and agreeing to dissagree is also what our country is founded on.
12 Political Disgust // Nov 20, 2008 at 2:20 pm
What does “god” have to do with anything here? You are assuming that marriage is a religious thing. I say it is not anymore and has not been for a long long time.
13 Jerame // Nov 20, 2008 at 6:31 pm
I believe that it comes down to this. Either marriage is the domain of the government, in which case the government has a responsibility to put no religion, (or lack there of), above any other, there by completely secularizing marriage, or marriage is the domain of churches and therefor the government should get out of the business of recognizing “marriages”, and get back into the business of recognizing business contracts.
In our society, we can either have marriage be a sacred thing ordained by God, where the government has no say, and individual churches or some secular equivalent are the recognizing body, or have the government be the recognizing body. But if the government is the recognizing body, they have an obligation to be secular. They can not choose one religion over the others or put a lack of religion lower then the other faiths.
This is the problem that I see. Government and religion, for the protection of both institutions, should not go together.
Just my thoughts, though I can see both sides of this argument, as I am a Christian, and also consider myself a firm believer in the separation of church and state. Thanks to both of you for your comments.
Leave a Comment