"You have said one of your best friends is a lesbian. So, what do you think?"
Hey folks,
OK. What is my take on the "Gay Marriage Movement across the country?" Honest question. I give you an honest answer. It is a farce. It is an attempt by a very small group of people to dictate to everyone else what they will and will not accept. They are saying that you WILL accept it, regardless if you believe in the lifestyle or not. It is not a real movement. It does not involve the "People." It is an attempt to circumvent the "People."
Of all the States that have allowed Gay Marriage to be legal, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Iowa, now Maine, with New Hampshire appearing to be next, NONE of them were voted on by the "People." Of the States where Gay Marriage WAS on the Ballot, including California, the "People" Voted NO.
A true movement is someone, or a group of someones, going out and talking to people. They go out and promote their cause. They inform the public why they feel their cause should be recognized and it ends up being Voted on. The "People" either vote for or against. If this someone, or someones convince enough of the "People", their cause succeeds. If not, the cause fails. The "People" have the power.
That is not the case with the "Gay Marriage Movement." My problem with all this is that it is not up to the "People." It is being legislated into law, and forced, by law, to be accepted. Even places where they have tried this, have been over turned when the "People" get their legal say. Hence, Prop 8.
Now my honest opinion on the issue itself is not really relevant here. The actual issue of Gay Marriage is not really the issue for me. It is the way it is being done that I have a problem with. If the "People" in Florida {My home State} were to have voted it in this past Election, I would have accepted that this is what the people wanted, it would have become law, and it would have been the way things are. But they didn't. They voted against it.
When you start allowing a small group of people total control over the rest, and then start using laws to control people, taking away their Rights, and dictate to them what they have to accept morally, you enter into dangerous territory. That is NOT America. That is not freedom.
Will this stand in these States? Maybe, maybe not. I would be willing to bet, that they will do everything in their power to keep this FROM the "People." They will fight this being put up for a REAL Vote on an actual Ballot. Because history has shown, when it is, the "People" chose NO.
Peter
Hey folks,
OK. What is my take on the "Gay Marriage Movement across the country?" Honest question. I give you an honest answer. It is a farce. It is an attempt by a very small group of people to dictate to everyone else what they will and will not accept. They are saying that you WILL accept it, regardless if you believe in the lifestyle or not. It is not a real movement. It does not involve the "People." It is an attempt to circumvent the "People."Of all the States that have allowed Gay Marriage to be legal, Vermont, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Iowa, now Maine, with New Hampshire appearing to be next, NONE of them were voted on by the "People." Of the States where Gay Marriage WAS on the Ballot, including California, the "People" Voted NO.
A true movement is someone, or a group of someones, going out and talking to people. They go out and promote their cause. They inform the public why they feel their cause should be recognized and it ends up being Voted on. The "People" either vote for or against. If this someone, or someones convince enough of the "People", their cause succeeds. If not, the cause fails. The "People" have the power.
That is not the case with the "Gay Marriage Movement." My problem with all this is that it is not up to the "People." It is being legislated into law, and forced, by law, to be accepted. Even places where they have tried this, have been over turned when the "People" get their legal say. Hence, Prop 8.
Now my honest opinion on the issue itself is not really relevant here. The actual issue of Gay Marriage is not really the issue for me. It is the way it is being done that I have a problem with. If the "People" in Florida {My home State} were to have voted it in this past Election, I would have accepted that this is what the people wanted, it would have become law, and it would have been the way things are. But they didn't. They voted against it.
When you start allowing a small group of people total control over the rest, and then start using laws to control people, taking away their Rights, and dictate to them what they have to accept morally, you enter into dangerous territory. That is NOT America. That is not freedom.
Will this stand in these States? Maybe, maybe not. I would be willing to bet, that they will do everything in their power to keep this FROM the "People." They will fight this being put up for a REAL Vote on an actual Ballot. Because history has shown, when it is, the "People" chose NO.
Peter
2 comments:
Post by Anonymous White Southern Blogger, c. 1855 --
"OK. What is my take on the "Abolition Movement" across the country? Honest question. I give you an honest answer. It is a farce. It is an attempt by a very small group of people to dictate to everyone else what they will and will not accept. They are saying that you WILL accept it, regardless if you believe in slavery or not. It is not a real movement. It does not involve the "People." It is an attempt to circumvent the "People."
"Of all the Northern States that have made slavery illegal, NONE of them were voted on by the "People." In the Southern States, the "People" (by which I mean of course the white men) overwhelmingly said NO..."
Peter, you get the picture. Basic issues of right and wrong are not necessarily well-decided by mere popularity, because we humans are frail and fallible and self-interested. Majorities tend to superimpose their own values and interests on such decisions, ignoring more fundamental, fair and objective ethical methods and values. We know for a fact that most Southern white men thought that slavery was more than fine -- it was a good thing, good for the souls and welfare of the slaves. Their own interests and situations blinded them to the obvious injustice.
This is why our Constitution is based on minority rights, because the majority will often trample the rights of any minority. And this is why we need judges: their function is to help us live up to our own standards of justice and fairness, even when such things are not popular with the majority.
By the way, I hasten to add that I'm not saying that denying gay marriage is ethically equivalent to the horrors of slavery; the two issues are on very different planes of moral significance, since the former does not involve physical harm to others. (In fact, I'm not even advocating gay marriage per se; I'm happy with civil unions or whatever.) I'm merely pointing out that the principle whereby you are judging here is probably tainted by our very human inadequacies.
That was my main point. However, I'm also very confused by a lot of the unexplained assumptions of your post. Why do you assume that gay marriage advocates HAVEN'T been "going out and talking to people"? I encounter such discussions on NPR, etc., all the time. And just yesterday, I heard the woman who led the Iowa gay marriage case, who said that it was accompanied by a campagaign to explain their position to everyday citizens, who responded positively.
I'm also confused by this:
"My problem with all this is that it is not up to the "People." It is being legislated into law, and forced, by law, to be accepted."
Ummm. Isn't this the Normal Way of Doing Things? You're trying to make the normal business of the legislature sound somehow demonic -- when, in reality, "the People" voted in the legislators and speak through them.
Another bizarre comment:
"When you start allowing a small group of people total control over the rest, and then start using laws to control people, taking away their Rights, and dictate to them what they have to accept morally, you enter into dangerous territory."
Well, yes. But what the heck does it have to do with the issue of gay marriage?! Who is this mysterious demonic cabal, this "small group of people"? More to the point, what "rights" are "TAKEN AWAY" from anyone by EXPANDING the right to marry? You're turning things completely upside-down here, in your haste to demonize "the other side" and portray them as some evil, inhuman conspiracy out to oppress us all and turn us into their mindless slaves. Such conspiracy theories are the stuff of the paranoid fantasy which seems to so fascinate many conservatives, but which has little basis in reality. It's sad to see you giving into these emotional urges instead of using reason.
Hey Kwix,
Welcome back to the OPNTalk Blog.
{Laughing} You say:
"I hasten to add that I'm not saying that denying gay marriage is ethically equivalent to the horrors of slavery; the two issues are on very different planes of moral significance"
But that is exactly what you are doing. In a very creative way I might add. Good job.
But the problem is that you really can not equate the two. OK. Lets look at your point here. I guess in this case, I could say the following.
I'm a Christian. I have the Right to practice my faith whenever and wherever I chose. You will accept me and the Government will accept me no matter what you believe. So I go to the Legislation and they create new laws and change old ones to FORCE you and everyone else to recognize me and my Right to say or do whatever I want. Not only will I be allowed to say or do whatever I want, but I want you to change the definition of Atheism to INCLUDE Christianity. Now, by law, I am to be recognized as an Atheist, Christian, that will be allowed to host Public meetings in Schools, Federal Buildings, ETC. You will accept it by law.
Or of course I could also ask you the standard questions. What about a Brother and Sister? If the very definition of Marriage is a Man and a Woman, do they not fit the bill? Why do we "Discriminate against them? What about old time Mormons? Since we do away with the Man and Woman thing, why not include Man and Women? You get the point.
The problem is that you have a small group of people that have Chosen to live outside of the established and accepted system. No one is oppressing them, enslaving them. No one FORCED them to do this. They have chose to do this yet they want the system to accept them. See them as equal. Which most I do not feel is against, as long as you do not have a few, CHANGING The system solely based on the inclusion of those outside it.
Using this example you put forth, you can take ANY minority group, and say they are equal to the Slave wanting to be free. And that a few individuals can change the laws to include them no matter what the majority thinks. That's just not the way it works.
I'm not demonizing anyone here. What I'm saying is that those that are Gay, are a VERY small Minority. Those ACTIVISTS are even smaller. I know some Gays that are quite happy with Civil Unions. There are less people, regardless of their views on Homosexuality, that are against this. What this is about is the very changing of the definition of what Marriage is.
To answer this.
"Ummm. Isn't this the Normal Way of Doing Things? You're trying to make the normal business of the legislature sound somehow demonic -- when, in reality, "the People" voted in the legislators and speak through them."
Bush was voted in, did you speak through him?
What my problem is here is not with Homosexuality in of itself. What my problem is here is the changing of the definition of Marriage, against the will of the people. The Creation of a Law to satisfy some extremist Radicals that what people FORCED by law to accept them.
Peter
Post a Comment