Sunday, October 26, 2008


Proposition 8 is a HUGE issue in California...the biggest of the issues on the ballot and certainly the costliest. Both sides are racking up huge sums of money, millions in fact. I like to think of myself as a moderate on most issues. I like to think that most people are moderates. We hang out in the center, the middle, the area of the spectrum where common sense tends to live-no radicals, no outliers, no fringe elements to muck up the works. It also tends to be the place where no loud mouths are, traditionally...hence, the moniker, "the silent majority". It's the "vocal minority" that tend to get heard and make news. Well, guess who's getting heard now?

The problem with laws or propositions that involve issues like homosexuality is that they tend to push "fundamentalist's buttons" and that's just never a good thing to my way of thinking. So, when I'm out on the street carrying my "Vote Yes On Prop 8" I have the misfortune of either standing next to a sign that talks about homosexuals wanting to "condition" our children OR I am somehow associated or judged as a fundamentalist, close-minded, judgmental person who hates all homosexuals, etc. And that's not true. And it's not fair. And I resent it. A lot. Any one who knows me would laugh at that insinuation. A lot. I have so little regard for whom anyone sleeps with, I can't begin to tell you. Who you or anyone else chooses to sleep with is up to you. It is YOUR decision and YOU are accountable for it and its consequences. Okay? Lighten up there Scooter. Date your granny for all I care. Just don't expect me to give you a lobby and a say in the legislature because of it, okay?

The reason I'm supporting Prop 8 is this: Religious freedom. If Prop 8 fails, the constitution of the state of California will have to be REwritten to redefine marriage as being OTHER than between one man and one woman. If that is the case, if marriage is REdefined, then rabbis, preachers, ministers, bishops and other people of faith who CHOOSE to NOT marry same sex couples, based on their religious beliefs, could be sued and churches closed. AND THAT IS NOT FAIR. THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE SHOULD NOT LOSE RIGHTS SO THAT A MINORITY OF PEOPLE CAN ENJOY ONE RIGHT-THE RIGHT TO MARRY. PERIOD. Religious freedom, people. It's what our founding fathers fought for. And besides that sentence having lots of lovely alliteration, it's important.

"WE CLAIM THE RIGHT TO WORSHIP ACCORDING TO THE DICTATES OF OUR OWN CONSCIOUS" 11th Article of Faith. Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints.

I make a covenant each week in front of witnesses to take upon myself the name of Jesus Christ, to keep His commandments, and to always remember Him. This is me holding up my end of that covenant. It's not popular. Not by a stretch. But I hope my friends can try to understand. Religious freedom.


frizzlefry said...

Actually, lawyers on both sides of the issue agree that our Freedom of Religion rights are not at risk. If that were the case, the church would already have had to shut their doors because of the discrimination against women in not giving them their freedom.

There are plenty of instances of discrimination in religious settings where those religions are not required by a court of law to change their religious views or the implementation of such.

After all, we actively discriminated against black men for around 10 years in our religion, after they were awarded first class status, and our freedom to worship allows that. We were never required to give them the priesthood.

This is quite possibly the biggest fear propaganda of the prop 8 issue, so I wanted to shout out so that you are reassured that it will not affect our religion unless we accept state or federal funds, or otherwise open ourselves up as a public entity or some such.

frizzlefry said...

*oops. discrimination against women in not giving them the priesthood and rights to lead congregations as a Bishop or stake President.

Sorry, I guess that freedom bit was a Freudian slip. . . :)

The Katzbox said...

I'm not certain it's propaganda at this stage of the game. Armed with the actual change in the state's constitution, there will be more "teeth" in the courts regarding lawsuits. If it weren't a risk, I don't think there would be such a concerted effort to pass it. I really think it a legitimate issue down the road. I love you IQ points.

The Bowmans said...

Not living in Cali, i'm sure a lot of what I hear isn't entirely accurate. But i have heard that the church has asked members to actively support Prop. 8. The church NEVER gets involved in political issues, so the fact that they would ask this tells me there's a lot more to it than we realize. As a member, how could you not follow the church leaders? Just wondering and thinking out loud.

Reuven said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
emily said...

Children have a right to a mom and a dad. The state of California allowing same-gender marriage may seem progressive to some– –but what it says to me is that the state of California sanctions a relationship that does not best serve children.

While no heterosexual parents are perfect, and some situations are down right abusive and traumatic, the response is not to eliminate a child’s right to a mom and a dad. The response is to better educate, better encourage, better help parents be better.

While a lesbian couple or a gay couple may provide a stable home, love, and support to a child. By definition, a same-gender marriage cannot provide them a mom and a dad. Every child has the right to a mom and a dad.

Society should sacrifice for the health and well being of its children.

This is why I am voting “yes” on prop 8 (on my absentee ballot).

yes on prop 8!

also to the concerned person above about the church getting involved, they will want to read this article by orson scott card:

The Katzbox said...

Well said and thank you so much for links. Orson Scott Card, a Democrat, has had many interesting things to say during this election. Being a registered Democrat myself, I can sympathize and empathize with many other LDS Democrats on the current political climate. Thank goodness we still have the freedom to elect our government officials eh?

frizzlefry said...

I support the reasons you mention, I just wanted to be sure that the freedom of religion piece wasn't given more weight than it deserves. It's been used as a "scare" tactic when in fact the original bill overturning Prop 22 specifically states that no minister will have to preform or recognize same-sex marriages. Any cases of this happening was in Canada or Europe.

Could it possibly be a risk? Maybe, but first amendment rights are still pretty sacrosanct. And once they are overturned, we will have much much much more to worry about than gay marriage rights.

I have heard many hateful things said by members of the church- mostly but not all teenagers- about gay people specifically and it concerns me that inaccurate information and the intensity of the discussions have led members to confuse anti-gay marriage measures with just anti-gay measures.

Because my son asked a question regarding this in class the other day, the boys told him he must be gay. And then started teasing him about having a crush on another boy. Judging by statistics, there is at least one child in their youth group who is struggling with these issues, and they are more than happy to say things such as, "We should just kill all of the gays" with no regard to how inappropriate that comment is.

I have yet to hear an adult actually reign in those kinds of situations. It concerns me.

Which would be why I keep inserting my two cents! :)

The Katzbox said...

I still believe, with all my heart, that freedom of religion is at risk. I believe that once the constitution is changed and the lawsuits start, then it will just be a matter of time before clergy somewhere in this country is brought up on civil rights "infringments" (based on those in other countries-and there are plenty!) and that will be the beginning of the end of freedom of religion. Those poor clergy in Brazil, Canada, etc that have had the misfortune of living/speaking their beliefs have been relegated to fourth-class citizenry-it's shameless and if even the most remote possibility exists for it to happen here, I have to voice my concern. I think that this is obviously the case or the Church wouldn't be pushing like it is. The fact that the Church is involved like this really means something. BIG.

We had a panel last night at Church for the youth to voice their concern. They're on the front lines on all of this. It's very difficult for them; probably harder for them than anyone. Most of the kids in the high schools are voting "no" because voting "yes" shows a "lack of compassion". If people truly understood Prop 8, they would most likely vote yes. However, many of our youth typically are unprepared or unable, for whatever reasons, to stand up to their intimidating/stupid/unkind/whatever peers, leaving them feeling embarrassed, or shamed, or inadequate, etc. Or conversely, our youth run the risk of being labeled "gay" if they're surrounded by idiots/fundamentalists who don't understand our youth and their choice to NOT hate gays or people who are different.

This is a very unpleassant issue and our youth are on the front lines. The upside is, they get to take a stand. No one is riding the fence here. Everyone is taking a hit. We're reading our scriptures and realizing that,"Well, this is it. Time to find our inner Captain Moroni". It would be nice to have a relatively easy time of it for our boys and girls, but the truth is, we've known for a long time that this generation, and the ones to follow, just aren't going to be that lucky-they're going to be that blessed!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Eliot Bowman said...

Yes on 8!!

The Katzbox said...

Thank you Eliot. I knew we could count on your own personal Capt. Moroni!