Prop. 8 boils down to redefining what the institution of marriage is, and whether it's traditional definition should evolve. As I've stated, I've thought it through on many logical aspects and could efficiently argue both sides (without naively resorting to character attacks). Those who argue that Prop. 8 is discriminatory are right in saying so, but not necessarily with the malicious undertones that are attached with the word "discrimination". The truth of the matter is that any and every institution is discriminatory towards one group or more. (example: Leisure World is a geriatric institution that discriminates people under a certain age, that's reverse agism) Just pick an institution and I guarantee you'll find discrimination everywhere, hmm...the discrimination argument doesn't really seem that strong now does it? Or should we go around picketing at every institution?
"Institutions are structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior. The term, institution, is commonly applied to customs and behavior patterns important to a society, as well as to particular formal organizations of government and public service. As structures and mechanisms of social order among humans, institutions are one of the principal objects of study in the social sciences, including sociology, political science and economics. Institutions are a central concern for law, the formal regime for political rule-making and enforcement. The creation and evolution of institutions is a primary topic for history." Wikipedia
The institution of marriage is a social structure that legally unites men and women with the intent to create a family and was/is not founded on discrimination, (discrimination is a natural result that comes with the fact that marriage is an institution). Now we all know it doesn't always happen that way, but I intend to uphold that ideal, regardless. I have the assurance that in my lifetime, gay marriage will be backed by our legal system. I don't agree with it, and I will never vote for it. I will just tally it up as another social blunder.
As for people calling God a jackass, you obviously don't know him or care to know him, so feel free to call him what you will. He's been called worse. Jesus Christ was crucified by a group of people who felt the way same way most of you feel right now. They saw a man that was telling them to change their behavior, and they said "we ain't changing shit!" They called him the lord of flies (Beelzebub, which implies that he rules over feces which is the major source of flies) and tried to shut his mouth by killing him. Truth is, despite the people's rebellion against choosing his "better way", he loves them and despises their sin.
People become involved in homosexual practices for many reasons. Those who feel they were born that way are not sinners for their natural attractions, sin doesn't come into play until that attraction is acted upon. I don't believe God made anyone the way they are. I believe he created humans and gave them guidelines as to how they should live, if they want to return to his presence. If you don't feel a desire to love God or even admit that he exists, so be it. I believe he is real, and when our mortal existence comes to an end and it's time for him to mete out our rewards, he will REWARD everyone according to their works. Everyone will feel that the reward they recieved was just, because God is just. Not everyone will return to live in his presence, but that does not mean that they are going to hell.
Not all christians hate homosexuals. I don't hate them, I love them, I just don't make love to them. Shame on anyone who does things to others with malicious intent. When all is said and done there is only one thing that truly matters to me. God loves us all and desires the best for us, even though we hate him for asking us to show restraint. I have natural urges to sleep with a lot of women and I'm married. I have to struggle with my sexuality as well. I have an even greater urge to kill and torture people, it almost consumes me at times (I know I got issues), but I must fight my "natural" urges to the day I die if I want to recieve a greater glory. I've asked God to strip me of these feelings, but I've come to the conclusion that this must be my obstacle to overcome, and in the end I can show him that I overcame.
always desiring for the unity in community,
Salvador
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Saturday, November 8, 2008
The Protests and Arguments on Proposition 8
Voicing your opinion, empowering or just whiny? It's funny how I voted yes on 8 after much consideration and without a hint of hatred in my heart for anyone, yet many people (who voted no on 8) feel the need to ignorantly attach an air of negativity to anyone who doesn't hold their position. The ironic thing about it is that they spew hatred while simultaneously repeating the clever "no on h8!"
Before I continue, Prop. 8 is being referred to as the Civil Rights Movement of the 21st Century. Really?! Prop. 8 is the Civil Rights Movement of the 21st Century?! People who are gay are suffering the black experience of the early to mid 1900s? As a whole, they're getting hosed down, raped, robbed, beaten, lynched/murdered, stripped, tarred and feathered, and forced to use sub-standard facilities apart from society? Wow! Not getting to say, "we're married!" holds equal weight to the aforementioned? Or, is it more like the Latino experience where they're currently suffering police brutality, racial profiling, deportation, absurd sentencing, wages far below minimum wage, and severe discrimination for their APPEARANCE, not their lifestyle? Hmm, Prop. 8 falls under that umbrella?...interesting.
I've previously stated several reasons for voting yes on 8, (I won't be a broken record about it) and discrimination and hatred had nothing to do with it, in the least degree. My vote was based on logic and reasoning. I could see and understand why people voted no on 8. I feel that to take an educated stance on anything, you must first be able to effectively argue all sides of the issue at hand. And, likewise be respectful of people who decide to take the opposing stance. Attack the issues, not the people. I recognize, as I feel you must have by this point, the ignorance that has almost thoroughly permeated both parties. But, enough of the soap box speech. My words seem to fall upon deaf ears. I was hoping that after the people had spoken, the issue would be put behind us. How "un-American" of me to accept the people's voice on this matter. This topic is obviously more important than, I don't know, people losing their life to actual WAR, to drug trafficking, to a prejudiced judicial system, to poverty, to mafia's and gangs, to rape, to incest, to child abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), etc. Let's continue this discussion that really has nothing to offer me or my people. Oh, I see the error of my ways, (sarcastically) let's fight for a group of people who aren't being IMPRISONED or MASSACRED, and are doing well off in our economy and society (collectively). Let me stand behind a group of people who are warring against another group's moral stance over semantics, not rights, SEMANTICS.
Unless, someone is willing to participate in an educated exchange of ideas, I will no longer engage in a discussion that is completely irrelevant to me.
Good luck with your "struggle",
Salvador
Before I continue, Prop. 8 is being referred to as the Civil Rights Movement of the 21st Century. Really?! Prop. 8 is the Civil Rights Movement of the 21st Century?! People who are gay are suffering the black experience of the early to mid 1900s? As a whole, they're getting hosed down, raped, robbed, beaten, lynched/murdered, stripped, tarred and feathered, and forced to use sub-standard facilities apart from society? Wow! Not getting to say, "we're married!" holds equal weight to the aforementioned? Or, is it more like the Latino experience where they're currently suffering police brutality, racial profiling, deportation, absurd sentencing, wages far below minimum wage, and severe discrimination for their APPEARANCE, not their lifestyle? Hmm, Prop. 8 falls under that umbrella?...interesting.
I've previously stated several reasons for voting yes on 8, (I won't be a broken record about it) and discrimination and hatred had nothing to do with it, in the least degree. My vote was based on logic and reasoning. I could see and understand why people voted no on 8. I feel that to take an educated stance on anything, you must first be able to effectively argue all sides of the issue at hand. And, likewise be respectful of people who decide to take the opposing stance. Attack the issues, not the people. I recognize, as I feel you must have by this point, the ignorance that has almost thoroughly permeated both parties. But, enough of the soap box speech. My words seem to fall upon deaf ears. I was hoping that after the people had spoken, the issue would be put behind us. How "un-American" of me to accept the people's voice on this matter. This topic is obviously more important than, I don't know, people losing their life to actual WAR, to drug trafficking, to a prejudiced judicial system, to poverty, to mafia's and gangs, to rape, to incest, to child abuse (emotional, physical, and sexual), etc. Let's continue this discussion that really has nothing to offer me or my people. Oh, I see the error of my ways, (sarcastically) let's fight for a group of people who aren't being IMPRISONED or MASSACRED, and are doing well off in our economy and society (collectively). Let me stand behind a group of people who are warring against another group's moral stance over semantics, not rights, SEMANTICS.
Unless, someone is willing to participate in an educated exchange of ideas, I will no longer engage in a discussion that is completely irrelevant to me.
Good luck with your "struggle",
Salvador
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
