Sunday, November 02, 2008

Prop 8 Domino Theory

For those of you domino theorist who believe that the defeat of Proposition 8 will lead to people sauntering down the aisle, in connubial bliss with their dogs, here are a couple of other dominoes to consider.

One of the groups backing Proposition 8 is the Mormon church. They have raised in excess of $12 million in support of a ban on gay marriage. What will the Mormon church back next? Although they have officially renounced plural marriage, if we as voters allow the morals and values of a religious group to define the law in our state, couldn't this lead to a push at some later date to re-institute plural marriage? Picture your husband or wife coming home and telling you to make room in your closet for spouse number two. And consider this: your children WILL be reading books in school about a handsome prince who finds and marries TWO princesses.

And if we allow our laws to be dictated by one church, won't others step up to get out the vote in favor of their beliefs? Will we be forced to accept the teachings of Scientology also? Will the next Proposition on the ballot be one that outlaws any noise during labor and delivery because it may induce engrams? And if we follow Yes on 8 "logic" your children will be forced to learn about Dianetics and to take free stress tests in school, and you won't be able to do ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

One of the arguments that proponents of Proposition 8 make is that allowing gay marriage erodes the value of this union. But aren't there other things that undermine marriages? What will voters be asked to ban next? Will we outlaw going out drinking with your buddies after work, not picking your dirty socks up off of the floor, failing to perform your, erm... marital duties with sufficient frequency? Surely running up excessive credit card debt, extramarital affairs, and divorce should be stricken from the Things Allowed Withing the Bounds of Marriage column also.

I only half jest, because our founding fathers had a pretty good idea of what the consequences of non separation of church and state could lead to. Thomas Jefferson wrote:

"History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government." and "In every country and in every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot, abetting his abuses in return for protection to his own..."

What Jefferson is suggesting is that to use religion as a moral yard stick to determine the laws of our state or nation, is to erode the freedoms and civil liberties this country holds dear. Please vote No on 8.

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Oh, Girl you are GOOD! If I'd read that article in the NY Times I'd have said "Fantastic"!! RM move over.

Meredith said...

OK so you know I am no religious freak, in fact I too generally oppose prop 8. But please take into consideration that there is a strong part of me that really feels gays already have equality, and being able to say they are married like me and my husband doesn't make them the same. They are not the same they are different, and that's OK. We don't all need to be the same. I loathe the fact that people want to celebrate diversity yet need to be able to say "I am married" like you and me. Again I really don't care if they want to enter into this blessed union of souls. But the rule should be then that if you want to be married like me, then take down all the rainbow's and just be like me. Sure the church is probably very fearful, but there are a strong group of people that just don't think that they want to share that title of marriage with a group of people that goes out of their way to celebrate their own diversity. I am not one of them, I really feel that if Gay people want to have the same martial BLISS that I have hell have fun.........the grass is always greener on the other side!
BTW, Queeen Wordy McWords-a-lot, you are an OK writer! So when are you going to have that essay ready for me!

I For One..... said...

Yay! Meredith is back with her thoughtfully crafted, yet opposing point of view. I missed you and your comments. Let the dialog begin....

California is a state that has always represented tolerance, and the San Francisco bay area is a shining example of that. I just resent the hell out of the religious ideologues who feel the need to impose their squeamish morals on people that are different from them. Prop 8 represents the worst of that and I just can't get behind it.

Oh, and that essay? When you admit that I'm an awesome writer!

Meredith said...

Oh I am not opposing what you say at all, I just think there is another side if the Pro Prop 8 peeps out there. I didn't even go into my anthropological point of view to support it either! I don't agree with all of the views you have about some things. And in a lot of way's you have made me reconsider my own views. This is a good healthy exchange. But I CAN'T wait till next week!

I For One..... said...

That, I agree with you on 100%. Tuesday can't come fast enough.

Anonymous said...

I agree with Mama. The NYT should drop Maureen Dowd and give you a spot on their op-ed page.

AD

Anonymous said...

Beautifully put, Meredith. Your's is a class act comment.

I For One..... said...

Thanks for the praise. Now if I could just get the NYT to sit up and take notice......

Steve said...

Maybe people in same-sex marriages feel the need to be more vocal about their unions to counteract the religious fundamentalists. I look forward to the day when a ballot measure like Prop 8 will be laughed at for even being suggested and people can quietly go about their lives in whatever kind of martial bliss they choose (between TWO people of any gender, that is).