I normally don't talk about politics or religion. I don't mind reading about politics but if you ask who I'm going to vote for, I'll tell you that I don't talk politics.
However, there is one thing that I just don't understand. Seriously, please help me out with this. I WOULD REALLY LIKE YOUR OPINION.
Voting "Yes" to Prop 102 means that "Only a union of one man and one woman shall be valid or recognized as a marriage in this state".
I have seen more signs all over Mesa and Chandler trying to get people to say "Yes To Prop 102" than any other sign that I have seen. I haven't seen a "Say No" sign yet.
It is VERY clear that I live in a city that does not support gay marriage. Without bringing religion into it, I don't understand why it matters if the man who lives next door to you wants to marry another man. Or the woman who you work with wants to marry another woman.
CAN SOMEONE PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS TO ME? You can post as anonymous on this one, I don't care... I just really don't understand why it matters to anyone else what other people do, if it doesn't affect you.
13 hours ago
10 comments:
I think marriage has a traditional definition, one man married to one woman. Not one man married to 50 women, or one woman married to 50 men, or a man married to a man, or a woman married to a woman. Or...a man married to his cat, or his dog, or with...you get the picture. I think people are trying to contain the matter as much as possible so that people aren't trying to marry everything. Reproduction happens between a man and a woman. Maybe that's what it boils down to. People are still going to do what they want I guess. Hope this helps a little (and I tried very hard to keep religion out of this :). Obviously I don't have all the answers, but at least it's a little insight.
From knowing a LOT of conservative and religious people, and being a liberal and religious person, I think that a lot of people feel the way superlole feels. I think that part of the problem with that definition, and I'm not saying this to be harsh or say that the above opinion is even invalid, I'm simply stating the liberal response, or at least my liberal response- the problem with that definition is that gay people also do not think that a person should marry an animal, gay people do not think that polygamy is ok, with the exception of those few crazy gay people that have a few crazy straight counterparts who think those things are ok. Its pretty insulting to say that two consenting adults who are making a legal and spiritual commitment to each other is in some way like wanting to marry an animal. I mean, its kind of absurd. And really, I'm not going to debate because I don't believe in that- if you disagree with me, you do, and i fyou don't, you don't, and that's fine.
My personal opinion on all of it is to move to a sort of European style of marriage (and I think we're going to write about this on the Social COmmentary blog =)- where the legal union of marriage is solely a matter of signing some papers in the court house and the religious act of marriage is separate. I wish in our country that any two consenting adults who meet all of the other criteria could go sign papers and have the same legal rights. Then, if they also want to make a spiritual union of it, you go to your church, synagogue, station of the holy light (um, that's a joke, but I think its real) and have a service before God. But one does not replace the other. That way any church that disagrees with gay marriage does not have to condone it or be a part of it. There's my two cents =)
oh and also, if you want more helping understanding any of your local propositions or state or federal ones, the League of Women Voters has good info on their website. www.lwv.org
oh and also, reproduction is not really an issue- do old people not get to get married? Or people who can't have babies and know it before marriage?
Ah, I love my free sprited girl's!
I have a lot of Gay friends and they are the most loving, non-judgemental people I have ever met! I would rather have a Gay couple living beside me than a pedophile(?), rapist or just plain ignorant people.
I am trying not to bring religion in to this, but God is our ultimate judge and Jesus loves us ALL!
The institution of marriage has made heterosexuals miserable for years - why shouldn't gays have the same right? Hahahaha....
Only half in jest - I wholeheartedly believe anyone lucky enough to find love should be able to get married. Period.
BTW - I tagged you for an easy meme on my blog :)
Heidi, I agree with you on this one... again without bringing religion into it. I have no problems, just like you Amanda. As long as it does not involve myself or my family. I have many gay friends (happy and homosexual) and they are wonderful people!
My take on everything: There is an increasing number of divorces (not including gay persons) in the United States. Why not be happy for those who choose a different route from your fellow neighbor and be happy that THEY are happy with the decisions they have made instead of being unhappy with decisions one has made and take it out on others?
Also, in AZ it seems as though religion does take precidence over many topics of politics. only when religion comes into play do we see things like this. As well as my religion is contradictory; love and accept everyone but being homosexual is a sin.
Thought: wasn't this country based on radical views? Breaking away from one country to create Equal Opportunity and Free Will for all?
Quick- I understand the definition of one man to one woman but I do not believe it goes into the extent of marrying cats, dogs, llamas, sheep... there are lots of men who are animals...
Doesn't matter... it doesn't have anything to do with me.
Life is too short. If anyone is lucky enough to find someone who makes them happy, I say "more power to them." All are entitled, regardless of race, color, or sexual preference to the same rights. That is what this nation was founded upon. If it doesn't touch you or hurt you in any way, just live and let live.
Post a Comment