Wednesday, November 5, 2008

Where to begin...

All day long I've been trying to wrap my mind around the fact that Californians took away a basic human right from their fellow citizens. How are we ok with the fact that $75 million has been poured into a campaign of hate while we are facing a global financial crisis and people are dying every day because they can't afford food, shelter or medical care. After talking it over with anyone who would listen and arguing it out with plenty of Prop 8 supporters, I am appalled, disgusted, saddened and out of things to say. Someone please help me understand why equality does not apply to everyone...?

6 comments:

  1. What basic human right are you referring to? Marriage? Marriage does not exist as a "basic human right" anywhere except in the perceptions of those sympathetic to the homosexual agenda.

    Were I an African American, I would be more than a little frustrated with the issue constantly being equated to the civil rights movement.

    And here's one who is: http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=57802

    This is not about civil rights. It's about whether or not our society is willing to grant certain privileges (not rights) to those living a certain lifestyle. And, it appears that we are not.

    ReplyDelete
  2. If you were no longer allowed to get married or have your marriage recognized, I have a feeling you would consider it a right. You can argue about a sense of entitlement all you want but I would say if it is granted to some it should be granted to all. That's what our constitution states, it's what our country was founded on. Equality is not exclusionary.

    In the interest of getting back to work, I'm going to copy and paste what I've already said about this on someone's note on facebook...

    equality for all, as called for by our constitution. i don't believe in abortion but i don't think it's my right to tell someone whether or not they can have one. i'd like to see murderers and child molesters be killed in horrible, vengeful ways but i don't think it's my right to kill them. God's eyes see us all as human with the same inalienable rights. that's what our constitution calls for and what our country was built on.

    (after getting attacked for the abortion comment, naturally.)

    i simply believe that a democratic society must function on as level a playing field as possible, with everyone having the same basic human rights. the church even says abortion is ok in certain situations. who am i to make that decision? should there be guidelines and other alternatives? certainly. but back to issue at hand... i believe that allowing people to partake in their rights (or privileges) as human beings and promoting equality is a benefit to my child and to the future of my country.

    Ben, we will never agree and that's ok... as long as this Proposition can be overturned. :)

    ReplyDelete
  3. Equal: Having the same quantity, measure, or value as another.

    To be treated with "equality", something should first be equal. A homosexual marriage does not have the same quantity, measure or value as a heterosexual marriage. Why should it be treated differently? Because it is different. Both science and common sense can tell you that much.

    As individuals, we do have the same rights. We all have the ability to marry someone of the opposite sex. That is equality. What they are asking for is something different. They are asking to be legally allowed to go beyond the bounds of the constitution and be given the means to do what no human being has ever legally been allowed to do in the history of the world. (Aside from the few locations who have already caved to their demands.)

    Equal rights does not mean anyone can do whatever they want in the eyes of a government, and it does not mean that I can simply create "rights" for myself where I see fit.

    The playing field is level.

    You say that it's not your "right to kill" murderers. Is it our right to enact any sort of punishment? Do we have a right to judge righteously and determine that they are in fact harmful to our society, and deal with them accordingly? Where does a line get drawn? Who decides? Should murderers be allowed to maintain all of the same rights and freedoms as I currently enjoy? Or should we as a society be allowed to say when enough is enough? I'm not equating homosexuals to murderers, just using your own example.

    "If it is granted to some, it should be granted to all."... So, nothing should be withheld from, anyone? There are no lines drawn? Freedom does not equate to anarchy. We lose certain rights, privileges and freedoms because of choices that we make.

    I do believe that, as our declaration of independence states, "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." I do not see "the right to marry someone of the same sex" in that list. The opposing argument will state that we are halting someone's "pursuit of happiness". I will argue that when that pursuit goes against society, science, common sense, and threatens the very building blocks of society as a whole, it is not a right, but a reckless endangerment. I'm sure our prisons are full of those who would claim we have interfered with their pursuit of happiness.

    Yes, abortion is acceptable in certain circumstances in the eyes of the church, as you have stated. Homosexuality is not. Lines do exist. We can't just draw them wherever we like, or erase them completely.

    I hope that we do agree one day, and I think that we will. But no, this is not an issue that's going away simply because Prop 8 was passed. And no, this isn't something that the church is going to change its stance on. But, it certainly helps separate the wheat from the tares.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Britt..I love you. Don't argue something like this...someone who doesn't see it like we do, or thousands of other LDS church members, probably never will. When we talk about it we see our friends, people with real souls who want to love and be loved. Who want to, despite being homosexual, have a family and a partner. I know what the Church says about it. They also at one point allowed polygamy and didn't let African Americans get the priesthood. I'm not saying that the Church is wrong with it's position on this issue, but I'm just saying that people will always disagree on some things. Don't stress, stop debating something that brings out hatred in some poeple. It just bums you out to see how harsh some people can be. I love you and am right there with you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. i find a sense of peace in realizing that i have compassion for others. it's simple, really. regardless of what laws state, i don't have restrictions. people don't have to be straight for me to want them to be happy...or believe they have the right to be.
    i agree with b&j above me. and i'm with you on this.

    ReplyDelete