Please go here and learn about the Courage Campaign. Its goal is to help protect the 18,000 (yes: eighteen THOUSAND) marriages in California that are now in danger of being legally dissolved thanks to bigots like Ken Starr (don't even get me started...). I've said my piece many times over already, so I'll just leave you with the below video, which pretty much sums up my feelings on the subject. (It does break my heart!)
"Fidelity": Don't Divorce... from Courage Campaign on Vimeo.
Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Current Events. Show all posts
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Friday, January 23, 2009
Getting it right
Yesterday was the 36th anniversary of the Roe v. Wade decision. As a woman, I've spent the past 8 years feeling a bit apprehensive in light of the previous administration's attempts to undermine or outright abolish women's rights, so it's with no small measure of relief that I read President Obama's words on the subject. I think the women of this nation can breathe a collective sigh of relief now. For the first time in my life, I feel supported and valued by my country's leadership; it's an indescribably wonderful feeling.
Obama's agenda with regard to women is not only about reproductive choice. His administration has compiled a comprehensive set of goals whose purpose is to bolster women's rights in almost every imaginable way. I hope that most of these initiatives see the light of day during his time in office. Particularly, I'd like to see sex education reinstated in schools that teach abstinence only. I'd also love to see pay inequity addressed and remedied once and for all (I can dream!). And I'm so happy that President Obama is a proponent of ethical stem cell research (see below). I think that our country is capable of making some huge strides under his administration, some that are long overdue, and I pray that he gets the opportunity to set them in motion, at the very least.
Obama's agenda with regard to women is not only about reproductive choice. His administration has compiled a comprehensive set of goals whose purpose is to bolster women's rights in almost every imaginable way. I hope that most of these initiatives see the light of day during his time in office. Particularly, I'd like to see sex education reinstated in schools that teach abstinence only. I'd also love to see pay inequity addressed and remedied once and for all (I can dream!). And I'm so happy that President Obama is a proponent of ethical stem cell research (see below). I think that our country is capable of making some huge strides under his administration, some that are long overdue, and I pray that he gets the opportunity to set them in motion, at the very least.
In short, I'm more excited about this presidency than any in my lifetime. In fact, I'm downright giddy!Supporting Stem Cell Research: President Obama and Vice President Biden believe that we owe it to the American public to explore the potential of stem cells to treat the millions of people suffering from debilitating and life-threatening diseases. Obama is a co-sponsor of the Stem Cell Research Enhancement Act of 2007, which will allow research of human embryonic stem cells derived from embryos donated (with consent) from in vitro fertilization clinics. These embryos must be deemed in excess and created based solely for the purpose of fertility treatment.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Hope
Listening to President (President!) Obama speak this morning, I felt myself beaming, eyes brimming. His speech was exactly what I've wanted to hear from an elected official since I've been old enough to understand what's going on in the world. Even if his ambitions are lofty, his goals somewhat unrealistic in a country as deeply corrupt as ours, at least he has the guts to stand up there and state our problems, plainly, and do the best he can to instill hope in a tired, disillusioned nation.
Here are a few snippets of his lovely words.
On the sad state of our country:
"That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet."
On equality:
"The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness."
On priorities:
"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do."
On cynics and rebuilding trust:
"Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions -- who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account -- to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day -- because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."
On prosperity:
"[A] nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous."
On the power of peace:
"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
On responsibility:
"To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it."
Congratulations, President Obama. I have high hopes for this administration; the time has surely come for actual change, not just empty promises.
Here are a few snippets of his lovely words.
On the sad state of our country:
"That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet."
On equality:
"The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness."
On priorities:
"We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do."
On cynics and rebuilding trust:
"Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions -- who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.
What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them -- that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account -- to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day -- because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government."
On prosperity:
"[A] nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous."
On the power of peace:
"To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist."
On responsibility:
"To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it."
Congratulations, President Obama. I have high hopes for this administration; the time has surely come for actual change, not just empty promises.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
For the Bible Tells Me So
I think everyone in this country should be forced to watch For the Bible Tells Me So. Even if it doesn't change anyone's opinion or open anyone's mind, at least they'd have to sit there and listen to these very human, very normal, very emotionally complex stories about love, family, understanding, and acceptance. They'd have the chance to witness the real impact homosexuality has on individuals and families in a country that still doesn't truly understand what it means to be homosexual -- in a country where the Bible is used (misused) selectively and inaccurately to exclude and judge. Maybe they'd be able to understand how flawed our human interpretation of the Bible is, how much we still don't know about its context, its intent. Maybe they'd see that the energy so many people expend denouncing and denigrating homosexuals might be better spent educating themselves and learning a little grace and tolerance.
I know I keep harping on this subject, and I normally don't like to be so serious and single-minded, but films like this really need to be promoted and recommended. The filmmakers did a beautiful job presenting such incendiary material without resorting to angry, liberal polemic. The film was clear-eyed, rational, and passionate without coming across as preachy. I was moved to tears several times -- with compassion and with outrage -- and was disappointed when I realized it was over. I wish more people would give this subject the consideration that it deserves.
I think it's a real problem that religion seems to shut down dialogue about important subjects in this country; that people can invoke "the word of God" and think that it's the end of the discussion. This film proves that we should be doing the opposite -- that we should be examining what the Bible really says about homosexuality and reconciling that with what we know about the subject in today's society. I think most Christians -- most people -- would be surprised by what they learn when they take a hard look at the actual verses and their historical context. It's not as black and white as some people would have you believe.
Jerry Falwell and Jimmy Swaggart and their ilk are committed to a message of hate, intolerance, and exclusion. They think they can bully people into submission by promoting fear, distrust, and closed-mindedness. The people behind For the Bible Tells Me So are committed to promoting clarity and understanding, hope and healing. You tell me: who's doing a better job of upholding the tenets of Christianity?
Friday, January 9, 2009
Sigourney Weaver takes on Prop 8
I love Sigourney Weaver's take on Prop 8 (via AfterElton).
Sigourney is starring in an upcoming Lifetime movie called Prayers for Bobby, which airs later this month."I think it’s unconstitutional to even have a referendum like that! People labor under this idea that homosexuality is a “lifestyle”. And the founding fathers were much too wise to try to legislate who loves whom. Homosexuality has been part of our history for thousands of years, and everyone has an equal right to pursue happiness in this country. It’s right there in black and white, and there are no exceptions. To even put this on the referendum, I can’t believe that that’s legal. To me, it’s a human rights issue.
"Gay marriage...is a very stabilizing force in society for those who want it — not everyone wants it. But the people who do, give them what they want. It seems insane to me to say to people who want it, you can’t have this nurturing thing. It’s the cruelest thing. People who voted for it really didn’t understand what they were voting for. I really think it’s misinformation."
Friday, December 19, 2008
100th post...with actual opinions!
Behold...my 100th post! On the one-year anniversary of this site, no less.
By design, I've kept this space pretty light in the year I've been tending it. There are so many maddening, depressing things going on in this world, and I spend enough time fuming about them privately to have much desire to add to the global diatribe in a more public forum. But even though this blog has had a fairly frivolous bent, I can't help but speak up every now and then about weightier issues. And since November 5th, one of those issues has plagued my thoughts almost constantly. It's the issue of equality -- of affording every human being on this planet the same rights and privileges under the law. I still can't believe we're debating that question, but here we are.
The topic has conjured a host of emotional responses in me -- outrage; frustration; fear; sadness; amazement. When I saw Milk last month, I commented to Jay that it was incredible how much and how little had changed in 30 years. Yes, as a country we've made undeniable strides in the last three decades. There's more acceptance overall, more willingness to understand other people's lifestyle choices without passing judgment. But when it comes to a vote, the majority of people are answering those questions with the same fear, intolerance, and hate as they always have, using the same specious arguments that have been debunked over and over again for decades.
The one that really angers me is the equation of homosexuality to bestiality -- you know, the old "If we let 'the gays' marry, what's next? A man marrying his dog?" line of reasoning. Frankly, I find that particular argument shamefully offensive. How can you compare the relationship between two mature, loving, consenting human beings to a man fucking his dog? No one's trying to legalize bestiality or child molestation -- heinous acts of violation that harm defenseless, non-consenting beings. People fighting against crap like Prop 8 are only trying to ensure that adults can marry other adults. Because they love each other. How in the world is that wrong?
Another argument I've heard is that a same-sex union is not an ideal environment to raise children. First of all, numerous scientific studies have shown just the opposite; it's the love, support, and commitment of the parents that matter, not the parents' gender. And second of all, if you're placing restrictions on who should raise children, why don't we start with addicts, or gang members, or, hell, convicted child molesters? And finally, who ever said that you have to be able to raise children in order to get married? Our species certainly isn't in any trouble of dying out, so that isn't the issue. I don't see how this can possibly be used by any reasonably well-informed person as an argument against gay marriage, but it's one of the most prevalent arguments out there.
Let's face it, in California you can marry a prison inmate, but not your same-sex partner of 5 or 10 or 20 years. Hell, if you're gay, a couple of straight, married, crackhead drug dealers have more rights than you do. And why? Because you have the same body parts as the person you love? Because you don't like to have sex with someone of the opposite sex?
Okay, seriously, this one really bugs me: what any person does in the privacy of his or her own home should never, ever be an issue in any argument against gay marriage. First of all, you want to outlaw sodomy? Then you should go ahead and lock up most of the straight couples I know. And more importantly, why should anyone be denied equal rights and privileges under the law just because some people aren't comfortable with their sexual proclivities? Lord knows I find the idea of people who eat each other's shit disgusting, but I would never claim that they shouldn't be allowed to get married because of it. That's just ludicrous.
And finally, I already addressed the religious argument in my last post on the subject, but even if there are objections to gay marriage on religious grounds, I feel I need to point out that we don't live in a theocracy. Even though the lines between church and state are blurred more than I'd like, they do still exist, and we should not let anyone's religion decide the fate of millions of people. And yet that's essentially what's happening in our country.
Jon Stewart vs. Mike Huckabee
I think one problem is that it's easy for some people to rest on exclusionary rhetoric when it's in the abstract. I believe that a lot of people would benefit from knowing a gay couple, or a gay person. Perhaps they'd realize that they're all (we're all) just people -- not "special," not "different," not "them" -- just human beings who want the same things as everyone does, who want to have a place and a voice in their own country. I'd wager that it's a lot more difficult to coherently relate any anti-gay marriage reasoning to a gay couple in love. When there's an actual human face on the issue, when it's someone's life and happiness you're trying to wreck? Not so easy.
I still want to know -- what are people so afraid of? What do they think is going to happen if gay marriage is legalized? Plenty of other countries, and even a couple states in our own country, allow gay marriage, and they're no worse for it. Our society isn't going to collapse because we give everyone equal rights. In fact, I'd argue that it'd get even better without all the friction, the anger and frustration and distrust dividing people down religious and party lines.
To sum up, I've yet to hear any sane, logical reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. I truly believe that the majority of people who are against gay marriage haven't given it much thought beyond the initial gut reaction (confusion? fear of change? fear of 'the other'?). And I find it outrageous that the same prejudices continue to find new voices generation after generation, the same way racism and misogyny are passed along. Few things are more dangerous than unexamined beliefs.
I don't want to be a total downer, so how 'bout a humorous take on the subject? Look, it's Prop 8: The Musical!
By design, I've kept this space pretty light in the year I've been tending it. There are so many maddening, depressing things going on in this world, and I spend enough time fuming about them privately to have much desire to add to the global diatribe in a more public forum. But even though this blog has had a fairly frivolous bent, I can't help but speak up every now and then about weightier issues. And since November 5th, one of those issues has plagued my thoughts almost constantly. It's the issue of equality -- of affording every human being on this planet the same rights and privileges under the law. I still can't believe we're debating that question, but here we are.
The topic has conjured a host of emotional responses in me -- outrage; frustration; fear; sadness; amazement. When I saw Milk last month, I commented to Jay that it was incredible how much and how little had changed in 30 years. Yes, as a country we've made undeniable strides in the last three decades. There's more acceptance overall, more willingness to understand other people's lifestyle choices without passing judgment. But when it comes to a vote, the majority of people are answering those questions with the same fear, intolerance, and hate as they always have, using the same specious arguments that have been debunked over and over again for decades.
The one that really angers me is the equation of homosexuality to bestiality -- you know, the old "If we let 'the gays' marry, what's next? A man marrying his dog?" line of reasoning. Frankly, I find that particular argument shamefully offensive. How can you compare the relationship between two mature, loving, consenting human beings to a man fucking his dog? No one's trying to legalize bestiality or child molestation -- heinous acts of violation that harm defenseless, non-consenting beings. People fighting against crap like Prop 8 are only trying to ensure that adults can marry other adults. Because they love each other. How in the world is that wrong?
Another argument I've heard is that a same-sex union is not an ideal environment to raise children. First of all, numerous scientific studies have shown just the opposite; it's the love, support, and commitment of the parents that matter, not the parents' gender. And second of all, if you're placing restrictions on who should raise children, why don't we start with addicts, or gang members, or, hell, convicted child molesters? And finally, who ever said that you have to be able to raise children in order to get married? Our species certainly isn't in any trouble of dying out, so that isn't the issue. I don't see how this can possibly be used by any reasonably well-informed person as an argument against gay marriage, but it's one of the most prevalent arguments out there.
Let's face it, in California you can marry a prison inmate, but not your same-sex partner of 5 or 10 or 20 years. Hell, if you're gay, a couple of straight, married, crackhead drug dealers have more rights than you do. And why? Because you have the same body parts as the person you love? Because you don't like to have sex with someone of the opposite sex?
Okay, seriously, this one really bugs me: what any person does in the privacy of his or her own home should never, ever be an issue in any argument against gay marriage. First of all, you want to outlaw sodomy? Then you should go ahead and lock up most of the straight couples I know. And more importantly, why should anyone be denied equal rights and privileges under the law just because some people aren't comfortable with their sexual proclivities? Lord knows I find the idea of people who eat each other's shit disgusting, but I would never claim that they shouldn't be allowed to get married because of it. That's just ludicrous.
And finally, I already addressed the religious argument in my last post on the subject, but even if there are objections to gay marriage on religious grounds, I feel I need to point out that we don't live in a theocracy. Even though the lines between church and state are blurred more than I'd like, they do still exist, and we should not let anyone's religion decide the fate of millions of people. And yet that's essentially what's happening in our country.
Jon Stewart vs. Mike Huckabee
I think one problem is that it's easy for some people to rest on exclusionary rhetoric when it's in the abstract. I believe that a lot of people would benefit from knowing a gay couple, or a gay person. Perhaps they'd realize that they're all (we're all) just people -- not "special," not "different," not "them" -- just human beings who want the same things as everyone does, who want to have a place and a voice in their own country. I'd wager that it's a lot more difficult to coherently relate any anti-gay marriage reasoning to a gay couple in love. When there's an actual human face on the issue, when it's someone's life and happiness you're trying to wreck? Not so easy.
I still want to know -- what are people so afraid of? What do they think is going to happen if gay marriage is legalized? Plenty of other countries, and even a couple states in our own country, allow gay marriage, and they're no worse for it. Our society isn't going to collapse because we give everyone equal rights. In fact, I'd argue that it'd get even better without all the friction, the anger and frustration and distrust dividing people down religious and party lines.
To sum up, I've yet to hear any sane, logical reason why gay people shouldn't be allowed to marry. I truly believe that the majority of people who are against gay marriage haven't given it much thought beyond the initial gut reaction (confusion? fear of change? fear of 'the other'?). And I find it outrageous that the same prejudices continue to find new voices generation after generation, the same way racism and misogyny are passed along. Few things are more dangerous than unexamined beliefs.
I don't want to be a total downer, so how 'bout a humorous take on the subject? Look, it's Prop 8: The Musical!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Jesus would vote No on Prop 8
I recently read a post about marriage and Prop 8 in which the poster writes candidly about why she got married -- from the love she has for her husband to the convenience marriage affords -- and defends every person's entitlement to those basic rights. She says:
I will never understand the position that your sexual orientation or gender identity should dictate how you're treated as a human being, or which rights you're entitled to receive. And I will never believe that a supposedly omniscient, benevolent being would want to see anyone marginalized, judged, or excluded based on something as fundamental as sexual orientation, something that simply isn't a choice. (Do you choose who you fall in love with? Who you're attracted to? If you do, I'd love to have a chat with you to see how that works.) We talk about equality in this country, about tolerance and respect, and then we lob outdated, fearful, uninformed rhetoric about the "sanctity" of marriage, the "unnatural" "perversion" of non-hetero relationships, blah blah blah, into the sphere of federal legislation. How is this allowed to occur in the 21st century? In a country that clearly defines church and state as separate entities?
"I got married so we could own property together. I got married so that we would have enforceable rights if anything happened to either of us. I got married because he’s got great insurance benefits & I’ve got a great credit union. I got married because when we weren’t married, the world seemed to look at us differently, like we weren’t really in love. I got married because it made everything (taxes, renting, car ownership, illness, life insurance, nearly everything) easier. Just one document & so many issues simply evaporated.AMEN.
And that surprised me. Social issues, family issues, governmental issues—completely resolved simply because I had a different last name, a legal document, and a [white] gold ring.
For these reasons and for all the reasons I didn’t list, I cannot condone restrictions on marriage between consenting adults of any gender. Nor can I sit idly by while bigots and homophobes attempt to restrict rights on the basis of religion at best and ill-articulated arguments at worst."
I will never understand the position that your sexual orientation or gender identity should dictate how you're treated as a human being, or which rights you're entitled to receive. And I will never believe that a supposedly omniscient, benevolent being would want to see anyone marginalized, judged, or excluded based on something as fundamental as sexual orientation, something that simply isn't a choice. (Do you choose who you fall in love with? Who you're attracted to? If you do, I'd love to have a chat with you to see how that works.) We talk about equality in this country, about tolerance and respect, and then we lob outdated, fearful, uninformed rhetoric about the "sanctity" of marriage, the "unnatural" "perversion" of non-hetero relationships, blah blah blah, into the sphere of federal legislation. How is this allowed to occur in the 21st century? In a country that clearly defines church and state as separate entities?
Sure, marriage between men and women has been around for thousands of years, and is a traditional, well-established institution that many people hold in high esteem. Know what else was? Slavery. And as for the arguments against gay marriage that involve such topics as procreation, child-rearing, morality, and gender norms, I would urge everyone to visit this site, which summarizes these and other popular arguments and addresses each of them thoughtfully, rationally, and dispassionately -- something that most anti-gay-marriage crusaders don't bother to do. Present me with a reasonable, informed opinion, and I'll listen. Spew ignorance and hate, and I won't.
I have no problem with Christianity, or any religion, for that matter. However, I do have a problem with things done in the name of Christianity (or, again, any religion) that impede people's basic rights as human beings. I have great respect for people who believe in the Bible because it emboldens them to be gracious, tolerant, respectful, kind, and brave. I do not respect people who use the Bible selectively as an excuse to further their small-minded, judgmental, hate-fueled agendas. I don't want to demean the Bible, which has a lot of profound things to say on a variety of topics, but it is a document that's thousands of years old, was committed to paper by men, has always been controlled by men (including the suppression of certain biblical gospels), and has been translated and edited thousands of times, often by people with their own agendas and biases. Those who selectively quote the Old Testament's proclamations against homosexuality seem to overlook the fact that the very book (Leviticus) that refers to homosexuality as "an abomination" also uses that exact term to describe shellfish. And commands that children who disobey their parents be put to death. And endorses slavery. And so on and so on. The reality is that the Bible condemns a lot of practices, many actively practiced by modern Christians. If scriptural condemnation is the sole basis of the argument against gay marriage? I'm unconvinced. I'm going to need a lot more to believe that the Christian God doesn't want GLBT people to have the same rights to happiness, equality, and choice as their heterosexual brethren. It seems counterintuitive to the whole Christian ideology.
I'm not even a big proponent of marriage -- in fact, I don't know if I ever want to get married. But I fully support everyone's entitlement to that right. I truly believe that fifty years from now, denial of rights to the GLBT community will be seen in the same light as racial segregation, or the denial of women's right to vote. Our own Declaration of Independence plainly states that any form of government that interferes with our ability to secure our "unalienable rights" should be "alter[ed] or abolish[ed]." I believe that this is one of those times, one of those rights. And if I ever get the opportunity to register my vote to that effect, I'll be one of the first in line.
I have no problem with Christianity, or any religion, for that matter. However, I do have a problem with things done in the name of Christianity (or, again, any religion) that impede people's basic rights as human beings. I have great respect for people who believe in the Bible because it emboldens them to be gracious, tolerant, respectful, kind, and brave. I do not respect people who use the Bible selectively as an excuse to further their small-minded, judgmental, hate-fueled agendas. I don't want to demean the Bible, which has a lot of profound things to say on a variety of topics, but it is a document that's thousands of years old, was committed to paper by men, has always been controlled by men (including the suppression of certain biblical gospels), and has been translated and edited thousands of times, often by people with their own agendas and biases. Those who selectively quote the Old Testament's proclamations against homosexuality seem to overlook the fact that the very book (Leviticus) that refers to homosexuality as "an abomination" also uses that exact term to describe shellfish. And commands that children who disobey their parents be put to death. And endorses slavery. And so on and so on. The reality is that the Bible condemns a lot of practices, many actively practiced by modern Christians. If scriptural condemnation is the sole basis of the argument against gay marriage? I'm unconvinced. I'm going to need a lot more to believe that the Christian God doesn't want GLBT people to have the same rights to happiness, equality, and choice as their heterosexual brethren. It seems counterintuitive to the whole Christian ideology.
I'm not even a big proponent of marriage -- in fact, I don't know if I ever want to get married. But I fully support everyone's entitlement to that right. I truly believe that fifty years from now, denial of rights to the GLBT community will be seen in the same light as racial segregation, or the denial of women's right to vote. Our own Declaration of Independence plainly states that any form of government that interferes with our ability to secure our "unalienable rights" should be "alter[ed] or abolish[ed]." I believe that this is one of those times, one of those rights. And if I ever get the opportunity to register my vote to that effect, I'll be one of the first in line.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
