We have heard a lot on proposition 8 from opponents to the victorious amendment. Some have been on this blog, some in the news, and some from friends.
While my next comment definitely does not apply to the majority of opponents it definitely applies to those making the most noise. The opponents and so-called defenders of the law, protector of rights, and the role models of tolerance have found themselves arrested for trampling police cars, disturbing the peace, assaulting the elderly, and the felony level destruction of personal property. This does not include the lowest of character assaults and threats on individuals of the Mormon faith in decietful advertising and riotous outbreaks at our temples and on city streets.
To be fair in comparison - the proponents of this proposition did have one altercation where a grown man attacked a 17-year old female. Just as horrendous.
But by comparison - this is the only like example.
And so - I make this comment only to let the opposition to Prop 8 know that so long as the behavior of the noise makers continues - their actions destroy any credibility that they are walkers of the talk, and validate that they are two tongued selfish thinking, zealots who are more concerned with themselves than any other group.
And so now I will respond to the comments and statements that fire me up the most:
Supporters of Prop 8 are accused of being hateful, discriminatory, and intolerant.
Hateful: No - not in the least bit. Our rallies have been respectful and peaceful. We have not gone to peoples places of worship and tried to drive fear into the hearts of those who oppose us. Fear is documented tactic by opponents of this proposition. Fear is also the main tactic of street gangs and terrorists. We are not hateful. Our values are different. That is all.
Discriminatory. Yes. This is discriminatory. But not in a bad way. We (our state and country) discriminate every day. I choose water over soda pop. I am not allowed in the carpool lane because I bought my hybrid too late. I dont get food stamps because I make too much, even though I cant afford to pay all my bills. I choose not to fool around with other women because I value being part of my wifes and childrens life more. I am not allowed in certain night clubs unless I bring a girl with me. I voted yes on 8 because I am discriminatory in what I want taught in public schools and I want my preacher to be discriminatory based on his values on who get does and does not marry in the church. So I had to be discriminatory in my choice on proposition 8. Every choice is discriminatory. Every single one. We all discriminate based on our personal values. My discriminating vote had nothing to do hate, gender, or sexual preferences. It had everything to do with what I want taught in schools, the freedoms I want my preacher to have in exercising our religion, the century old traditions I want preserved. There is nothing wrong with that.
Intolerant - No, quite the opposit. We live a higher law. Its called un-condition love without condoning. You see - this world says if you dont agree with me you are intolerant and unaccepting. I live something higher. I say you are free to choose and live they way you want regardless of how much I disagree with you. I will love you regardless - but at the same time I wont condone what I disagree with. We all have friends who have been addicted to drugs. We love them dearly. But we dont do drugs, we dont encourage their addiction, and we dont make it easier for them to continue in the addiction. In essence - we completely disagree with their lifestyle of drug use, we teach our children to never use drugs. But we still love the person.
While drugs is physically harmful - one might say there is no comparison. I would say it is a perfect comparison. Most of Christianity and other world religions considers homosexuality a sin, unnatural and against Gods command and contrary his design for his ultimate creations, man and woman. Thus homosexuality is as spiritually dangerous to us and drugs are physically dangerous.
They both separate us from God.
Do you really want to tell
No - I dont . But I will. Because more than that - I dont want would happen in our school system and to our preachers.
Again my rights and priviliges would be taken away if this were to happen. Dont say it wouldnt - it already has for those in Massachussetts.
I would however support a national civil union registry. Let the state stop administering marriages in the courts and let it be optional and no longer a legal status - but purely a religious ordinance.
That way preacher can marry who they want based on belief, schools teach that legal unions between two person get certain tax benefits, health benefits etc...and morality discussions are completely taken out of the government. If i want a tax break, me and my current wife would need to file for a civil union. This would give greater equal legal responsibility to parents of children in the case of civil union annulments and gay couples could enjoy the same legal benefits that currently are offered to only married people.
Everyone would win that way. My religious freedoms are preserved. My parental rights in what values I teach my children are still mine to choose. And homosexual couples enjoy the same legal benefits nationally and statewide.
Opponents of Prop 8 ask why my religion is more important than theirs: Here is why. Let me use an analogy.
It is completely legal to throw a punch at somebody. It becomes illegal once that punch has landed on the persons face or body.
Likewise - we are free to live our religion to the point at which it stops another from living theirs. That being said - when preachers are sued and lose in court because they chose not to marry a gay couple - that preacher lost his freedom of religion 0r a punch was landed on his face.
Now - if your religion says you can get married. Get married by your religion. Not someone elses.
But as the courts have chosen already - any person is authorized to marry, must marry anyone who can legally be married are they are violating discrimination laws.
The current discrimination laws in relation to marriage -take away a preachers rights to live his religion.
That is what is wrong with the current system. So it not that my religion is better - its that currently your religion / beliefs stops me from practicing mine because of discrimination laws.
That needs to change. Until that changes I oppose same-sex marriage.
In conclusion...contrary to what all opposition says about this being about hate and intolerance etc...it has nothing to do with that.
It has everything to do with keeping peoples religious beliefs in tacts, with allowing parents to choose what values are and are not taught to their children.
I am thrilled that a majority of this state sees it like I do - deeply dissappointed it was so close.