I know I'm on a completely different page than practically everyone at BYU when it comes to the passage of Proposition 8 in California. And since I'm not a California resident, I have no ability to even vote on the matter. But I just take issue with the extent to which the Church is supporting and encouraging members to vote for Proposition 8 (for those who don't know, the initiative seeks to define marriage as between man and woman only, intending to trump the most recent California legislation allowing same-gender couples to marry). Frankly, I'm quite appalled that Church members are so gung-ho supportive of Prop 8. Personally, I am not supportive of gay "marriage". Yes, I believe marriage is between a man and a woman. However, when two consenting, responsible adults have a committed relationship for long periods of time, I do support their civil rights including hospital visitation, filing taxes jointly, sharing health insurance, etc. and if they want to call that marriage, who are we to tell them they cannot?
What will homosexual marriage do to you? Honestly? Is it going to ruin your life? Then why would you vote for a proposition that will in fact ruin someone else's? To me, it just does not seem very Christ-like. Same-sex attraction is very much a biologically-driven lifestyle, and for those without the Gospel, that lifestyle hurts no one. Research has proven that children raised by homosexual couples are just as well-adjusted, do just as well in school, and have no greater chance of being gay. There was a pamphlet being distributed to members of the Church from an anonymous source with many false and misleading statements regarding the consequences of Prop 8 not being passed. Professor Morris Thurston, a Harvard-educated law professor at BYU, wrote a response to the pamphlet. You can find it here.
Voting for Proposition 8 simply hurts the Church. It hurts those men and women within the Church who struggle with same-sex attraction. It hurts our image. It turns people against the Church. Joseph Smith once said that he teaches his people correct principles and allows them to govern themselves. We have been taught the correct principle regarding same-sex attraction and acting on those tendencies. Now let's try out a little agency and govern ourselves while allowing others to make their own decisions without the government interfering.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Human calendar
Blogs I Love
Flicks I dig
The good ole days
-
▼
2008
(119)
-
▼
October
(16)
- Colorado
- The Women of Genesis series
- WomanStats blog!
- BYUSSR
- The loveliness of life
- Pick your Spot
- So over the wedding posts...
- The swanky reception
- Enough of all this serious talk.... our honeymoon!
- Seriously??
- Um, yes, I have a temple recommend
- A veritable deluge of wedding pictures
- Because it's hilarious....
- Prop 8
- Beng married.
- story of my life.
-
▼
October
(16)
12 comments:
Thanks so much for linking to that response! I had heard those things through the grape vine (but had not seen the original pamphlet) and was concerned.
I really wish they'd just set up some kind of domestic partnership for same sex pairings. No one gets their knickers in a knot over the definition of marriage and same sex partners get tax benefits, hospital and survivorship rights, property rights, etc. I think that would be awesome.
Hi Caitlin, I'm a friend of Lauren's and I just read your blog and comments. I live in Arizona and we are voting on a similar proposition. I hope you don't mind my comments.
There are many ways that gay marriage will affect the family -ways that we might not see right away. This is MORAL issue, not a political issue. Which is why the church is taking a stand. It is protecting the family unit....
Did you know that it would affect the way that marriage and sex education is taught in public schools? Churches could be forced to allow gay marriages in their chapels.
I found this on a non-lds website:
In general, fundamental social changes in long-standing traditions and institutions should be seriously considered only where there is strong consensus for change, as well as clear evidence and powerful reasons for the modification. Change for the sake of social experimentation and perceived "cultural progress" is inherently dangerous and jeopardizes the ordered liberty that is necessary for a free society.
This change threatens the very coherence and stability of marriage as a social institution. Social science today tells us quite a bit about how the experiments of recent decades with household forms other than the intact family--such as cohabitation and single parenting--have affected children and adults alike.
Changing the definition of marriage--or even remaining neutral as to that definition--breaks down the very argument that gives marriage its unique and preferable status in society. If marriage becomes just one form of commitment in a spectrum of sexual relationships rather than a preferred monogamous relationship for the sake of children, the line separating sexual relations within and outside of marriage becomes blurred, and so does the public policy argument against out-of-wedlock births or in favor of abstinence.
Based on current evidence and settled reasoning, it would be a terrible folly to weaken marriage either by elevating non-marital unions to the same position or by lowering the institution of marriage to the status of merely one form of household.
When I read the article in on www.lds.org in the newsroom section, I realized more than before that we are protecting the children. My children. Your children. Families, marriage and children. When you read the Proclamation of the Family, written in 1995, the statements in there scream very loud to me as prophetic in this time.
I do not hate gay people, and I agree that hopsital visitation and some of those other things you mentioned should be rights to every one - health insurance, etc. But I don't think that legalizing gay marriage is the solution.
So, I just read your link and saw that some of the things I say are on there as misleading, but it still doesn't change my belief in the statements that follow. And I do believe it will change the way our children are educated. How can it not?
Caitlin, you are amazing. Thank you for saying those things!
AMEN.
God bless you for writing this post.
And thanks for the kiss today (shh don't tell Tim). ;-)
My sister-in-law lives in Maine where they allow gay marriages. They recently passed a new law that states if someone thinks they "might" be gay or lesbian then they have the right to go into and use the restrooms, locker rooms etc. of the opposite sex. This is ok even before they have "gender reassignment" surgery. No one is allowed to question their presence or ask them to leave because then it would be considered a hate crime or being predjudiced against homosexuals.
In other words if a curious teenage boy wants to wander into the girls locker room during high school gym class to check things out all he has to say is well ...I think I "might" be gay. Well then come on in!
I wonder how many women and young girls will be molested or raped because any man can walk into a woman's restroom or locker room when ever they want? Would you want your daughter going into a restroom where men and boys could come and go at will and unchallenged? Would you want your son to be embarrased and shocked by a young woman undressing in front of him in the boys locker room? This is just one of the end results of allowing gay marriages.
They have also mandated that the sex education classes in the public schools be required to teach that gay marriages are normal and acceptable.
It's naive to say -ok let them live their lives it isn't bothering me. In reality it causes a domino effect in that it changes all the rules. By being forced to make accomadations for this minority, it results in changes in the way the majority are allowed to live their lives, whether we agree with these changes or not. They may gain some freedom in the way they choose to live their lives but only at the expense that we lose some of ours.
I urge you to check out this video in response to your calls for "a little agency" and "without the government interfering."
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1815820715/bctid1822459319
I love gay people the same way that I love straight people. But I will do anything the Prophet asks of me.
Hi Caitlin Carroll,
Yes I stalk your blog because you are one of very few of my friends who have blogs and say anything of substance.
In response to allowing "Gay Marriage," in the United States there are larger issues that are breaking up Families and redefining the family structure as we speak. Such as Guns, Violence, Poverty, Drugs, Unequal education, and racism. These things are playing a vital, real and proven role in breaking up a family unit.
I offer you this quote from a fellow poster, with all due respect:
"If marriage becomes just one form of commitment in a spectrum of sexual relationships rather than a preferred monogamous relationship for the sake of children, the line separating sexual relations within and outside of marriage becomes blurred, and so does the public policy argument against out-of-wedlock births or in favor of abstinence."
The very things that cause out-of-wedlock births and non monogamous relationships (if this is what you are concerned about) is not whether or not your neighbor can marry their LIFE PARTNER it is the more serious "Moral" issues in our society. The one thing I find missing in any of your posters arguments that what is of the utmost importance and what I have been taught through my christian faith is Social Responsibility. If you are so concerned with upholding your faith and what your church community has taught you, I have no doubt that you have heard of the golden rule, then posters on Caitlin Carroll/browning's blog I urge you to get angry and mobilize and hand out pamphlets about poverty, drugs ruining communities, domestic violence and the abysmal state of our education system in this country. These are the fundamental problems single-handedly dividing families and ruining them.
Lest I remind the posters that the issue of Marriage is a church issue. There is no definition in the Consitution of Marriage, there should not be, that is for a church to decide and if they decide differently from another church then so be it. There is no one church in this country that is this beauty of this country and one of the most important founding principles that our forefathers had to offer.
These people seeking marriage to their LIFEPARTNER (which is really what a husband and wife should be called, because that is what it is) have every right to because they have gotten to the level in their loving and committed relationship to show God they are committed to him and each other. There is no other answer than that commitment comes before whatever happens in the bedroom.
Are you going to make it personal for you? Then let it be personal for them and have God decide, if that is what you believe.
Thank you.
Keep Writing I like it a lot! P.S. keep fighting the good fight.
p.s. I hope that all made sense.
In response to your blog specifically, haha, I couldn't agree more.
My Father is a priest and he had struggled with it for a while, and he finally made it clear to me that Commitment is what God Honors and that is what matters most.
I hope all is well!
Thank you anonymous for posting the link to the video. It's the first time that I've seen it and it just reafirms the importance of showing our support for the Family Proclamation and marriage protection, proposition 8.
Just because we agree with a modern day prophet and are not afraid to stand up for what we believe doesn't make us timid little sheep who can't think for ourselves. I have researched this issue and I along with many other Christians believe that the right thing to do is to vote to protect marriage between a man and a woman.
And in case you were wondering ...
"Proposition 8 does not take away any rights from gay and lesbian domestic partners. Gays and lesbians in California can already enjoy all the legal rights and benefits of marriage. The California Family Code says, “domestic partners shall have all the rights, protections and benefits” of married spouses. There are NO exceptions to this. Proposition 8 will not change that."
A comment to Luch Fitzgerald: I don't agree with your statement: "These people seeking marriage to their LIFEPARTNER (which is really what a husband and wife should be called, because that is what it is ..."
In our church we believe we can be married to our spouse not just for this life -but for all time and eternity. There's a big difference between the two.
Post a Comment