http://deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,700237300,00.html
I know by my pulse rate right now that I shouldn't type much. I just don't get it. I know it's an all too common way in which groups treat each other in human history and we don't have it as bad as others who've been on the business end of such "defense of family" and "concern for children".
But it stings, to an unhealthy degree, when it's your home and your marriage in the ostensibly benevolent cross hairs, when they hope to coerce your family out of existence. There is little like that feeling that your home is being targeted, your marriage and children insulted as defective, and by an organization so close to you and entangled in so many people around you. And that couched, deceptive, double-speak language of love is near too much to take without letting my resentment for its misuse to spill oven into my siblings and so on.
But I know, I know. I'll calm down soon and start moving on again. I always do.
At least I've a couple more articles about ready. What good does that do? Probably none outside myself. It helps me feel like I've done something, even if it's on a site far from ready. Anyway, thanks for the edits on the last couple, and I'd appreciate more.
http://isocrat.org/politics/marriage/ideal_family.php
http://isocrat.org/politics/marriage/law_infertility.php
http://isocrat.org/politics/marriage/otherpairings.php
I'm headed out to play on the tramp with the boys or something similarly therapeutic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
10 comments:
"But it stings, to an unhealthy degree, when it's your home and your marriage in the ostensibly benevolent cross hairs, when they hope to coerce your family out of existence. There is little like that feeling that your home is being targeted, your marriage and children insulted as defective, and by an organization so close to you and entangled in so many people around you. And that couched, deceptive, double-speak language of love is near too much to take without letting my resentment for its misuse to spill oven into my siblings and so on."
I laughed at the irony of this statement... often that is the argument to keep marriage between man and woman.
The Church's strong position on this does bother me. I can understand to a degree on why they want to limit marriage, but the fact that the leaders go so much out of their way to protect such feelings is what troubles me.
In fact, this is the only issue my parents are aware of that I have against Mormonism.
The problem is that the church leadership is for some reason convinced that if gay marriage becomes prevalent, our society will somehow fall apart. They give neither reasons nor evidences for this (because there are none). In the church, you're just supposed to believe that they have some sort of "special" knowledge that we aren't privy to. That their actions detrimentally affect not only church members, but also (perhaps even more so) non-Mormons is what I find most reprehensible about this whole thing.
If you look at what was said 50 years ago about inter-racial marriage, one will see a strange parallel, especially strange because the church leaders seem to be conveniently ignoring all the society-destroying that never happened when inter-racial marriages became legal and segregation ended.
They had no evidence then, and they have none now, and yet they don't seem to learn from the past. For men who are supposedly inspired of God, they sure seem to be (unsuccessfully) making up a lot of stuff up as they go along.
It's one of the reasons I just had to stop participating in the church. They were asking me to judge this lifestyle and these people--but there was no blasted reason behind it. No one could ever tell me WHY things were the way they were, and I couldn't believe in a god so unkind.
It makes me really angry too. Too angry really to say anything useful.
"Do All You Can" applies to us as well.
Many couples are choosing a wedding registry with Equality for All (www.equalityforall.com), an umbrella group of organizations working to defeat the ban. In lieu of wedding presents, couples can direct their friends and family to donate money in the couple's name to defeat the anti-gay amendment.
Scot, if you and Rob happen to do this, I will make a substantial donation.
See http://origin.mercurynews.com/news/ci_9657096
"I laughed at the irony of this statement... often that is the argument to keep marriage between man and woman."
No way. They are actually telling people that the law allowing marriage equality actually targets and takes marriage rights away from heterosexual couples? Or that gay rights activists are trying to do this while saying it's for the good of children that heterosexual couples have no legal recognition? Could you point me to anything official on that, or is it just implied? I'd love to collect it.
Craig: "In the church, you're just supposed to believe that they have some sort of "special" knowledge that we aren't privy to. "
And you know? That's all fine by me, until it tells you to punch your neighbor.
ayw "No one could ever tell me WHY things were the way they were"
Ug, I know, and when your given an "explanation", it can sometimes even be worse :-).
Mr. Fob, when you're in town, we can grit our teeth together.
And I may make you pay up, mohohawaii.
*hug*
:-/
I'd also like to contribute, should you decide to register per MoHoHawaii's suggestion.
Scot, often I would hear church members make the assumption that allowing same-sex marriages would in fact destroy the concept of the family. They literally feel threatened by such a law passing. I think it is impressive that you are honestly able to use the same concept regarding your family, and how you feel threatened.
For example... someone just posted this on my video blog:
"The traditional family is not superior because it enhances human bonding, it is superior because it can provide a setting for children that is impossible to replicate without both a father and a mother."
thanks switch.
And mohointx
Ahh, that old line. I'll get to that on isocrat.org, or have already. I just don't how people can use the "I'll hurt your family, so you don't hurt families" argument so easily, particularly when no one is trying to restrict their legal standing.
Post a Comment