I posted this as a comment in one of the Coolkidsroom's entries, but I put more effort in it than I intended so I thought I would post it here as well -
"One really has to consider how society today views marriage as opposed to the institution's origins and history. In ancient times, a "marriage" was based on property distribution, gaining power, or having children. If this is the case, wouldn't it make sense for these arrangements to have existed long before humans even began to record history, before anything that we would recognize now as religion? For many religions today, bringing children into the world and raising them to believe in God is still stressed within marriage - does that mean an infertile man or woman has no reason to marry? Of course not.
In any case, it is obvious that the reasons for "marriage" have evolved as we have. Not everyone views marriage as a religious union, but as a legal and/or social union. It wasn't even until the 1500's when the Council of Trent required the presence of a priest and witnesses in order for a Roman Catholic marriage to be recognized. Before this point, marriage by consent was the norm. Does this invalidate the "marriages" prior to this point?
Long story short, why do (most) people want to get married nowadays? To spend the rest of their life with someone they love, legitimize their relationship in the public eye, whatever have you. What makes 2 men or 2 women wanting this different from a man and a woman? The church has stood the test of time and whoever wants to follow what the church suggests, that's fine. But not everyone wants a religious wedding. Not everyone is religious. The freedom of religion means the freedom to worship whoever you like, however you'd like, but it also means to not pass legislation in our country that would infringe another's freedom of religion or freedom to not adopt religion at all, which includes the right to a marriage defined outside of the church's terms.
Honestly, I don't know why people are so bothered with how others conduct their lives as long as they aren't hurting themselves or the well-being of others. And as for civil unions being compared to marriages, let us remind ourselves how "separate but equal" turned out for us before..."
Edit - Part 2:
"To clear up some things, I brought up the existence of marriage before religion/recorded history because many of the most popular and influential religions are codified into a specific doctrine for which its followers must obey - the Bible, the Qu'ran, the Torah, etc. Whether religion existed before recorded history or not does not matter, you really cannot state that marriage was created through the church as we know it, therefore the church has no more right to control marriage than the state does.
As for the personal freedom issue, whether Prop 8 passes or not, heterosexuals are not denied the right to marry. Voting no on Prop 8 really is not infringing on your or my freedom of religion because we will still be able to exercise our right to be married if we pleased. If Prop 8 passes, some of our friends would lose that right. Nothing would change about the church. The church will not recognize same-sex marriage either way, so only the freedom of homosexuals will have a real impact. Just like when Roe vs. Wade was passed - the church's position on abortion remained the same, and those who stood against abortion still had the choice of being pro-life. Legalized abortion was not forced into their ideology.
The entire text of Proposition 8 is less than 10 sentences long, but the only words that matter are: "Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California". This includes marriage through church, marriage through the state, marriage period. Same-sex couple will not be able to marry, even with a separation of church and state. Where is the equality in that? Even if civil unions are supposedly equal to marriage, then why do people still want to get married and not just accept a civil union? Or leave it at cohabitation? What marriage means to you is different from what it means to me, from everyone else in California, and it has changed and evolved since the beginning. There is much more to marriage that transcends sexual orientation."
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
Political Peeves: Sarah Palin
With the upcoming election in less than a month, I can't help but give my 2 cents on the campaign and issues that I think are important and to get it out of my system, even if it's just on this page and for its 5(?) readers. This will be the first of a few posts, and I'll start off with my feelings about Sarah Palin.
If any of you have noticed this in person, I will now explain why everytime someone mutters the words "Sarah Palin", my typical reaction is to do something like this:
Roll eyes + *sigh* = my blood starts to boil. I can almost feel it.
Forreal, I have irrational hate towards this woman as a politician. I mean I'm sure she's a great mother to her family and would blend in just fine with the PTA and band (and hockey) moms, but this woman's anti-science, anti-environment, and anti-women's/ reproductive rights stance just grinds my fcking gears. My boss at work, a well-off, Orange County civil trial attorney, is pretty much as Republican as one can be; he calls Sarah Palin "the village idiot".
And before someone tells me that this election is about electing the next president and not second-in-command, I am well aware of that. I support many of Obama's policies and would vote for him over McCain, regardless of the other name on either party's ticket. But this post is about Sarah Palin and not Obama, and if you don't like it then GTFO. It just scares me that McCain would choose someone so out of touch on issues as his Vice President. Honestly. Why? It's not because of experience or merit or qualifications or anything that would seem to make sense, that's for sure. To reel in female voters who will vote for her based on her sex? Maybe. If that's the case, that just pisses me off even more if his campaign thinks I will vote for a candidate just because she is a woman without reading the issues. I am not that stupid, and I certainly hope all other female voters aren't either. She is no Hillary. She is no champion of women's rights.
Since there are so many things I could say about why I can't stand Sarah Palin, a short list will have to suffice for now. Feel free to do your own research about these points:
+ On her foreign policy experience: "Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundary that we have with Canada...our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of..." 'Nuff said.
+ "Troopergate" scandal. Abuse of power? Unethical?
+ Although no books were banned from the local library in Wasilla, in 1996 then-mayor Palin had raised the issue of banning books to librarian Mary Emmons at least twice. Emmons flat out opposed Palin each time. Some time later, Emmons was fired, not because of censorship, but because Palin felt that she did not have Emmons' support. Palin then decided to withdraw her termination letter to Emmons after residents rallied behind the librarian and against what they thought was Palin's attempt at censorship.
+Supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge , the largest protected wilderness in the United States. I should note that McCain does not even support this. Opposes listing the Polar Bear and Beluga Whale as endangered species and even sued the federal government after the bear was listed as threatened in May.
+Opposes embryonic stem cell research. My bias as a Biosci major may be a factor for me here.
+Claimed that global warming is not man-made, but later claimed that she does not rule out man's influence either (I say damage control by her advisors). Hello - carbon emissions? Deforestation? The meat industry? With her answers to questions about this issue and other ones like foreign policy, she just does not seem to have a clue about important issues that I want my Vice President to be somewhat knowledgeable about. I don't want a "Joe Six Pack" or a hockey mom in office, I want someone exceptional.
+She has stated that she is a proponent of teaching both evolution AND creationism in schools. It has also been reported that she endorsed the teaching of Intelligent Design - and if you've been reading my blog, you know how I feel about that. Although Palin has not necessarily pushed for Creationism in the classroom, I think we should just stick to a separation of church and state. Religion can and should be taught in religion or theology class, but not as science. I also wonder if proponents of teaching creationism alongside evolution would feel the same about the teachings of Buddhism, Hinduism, or Islam in the classroom- it makes me question whether Palin would still follow her own words: "You know, don't be afraid of information"...
+Palin is pro-life, and although I respect others who share that same stance, it's important for me to vote for a pro-choice candidate. This topic will get its own post in the future, focusing on the Global Gag Rule because this policy does not get a lot of publicity but I think it is an important one that deals with women's & reproductive rights, foreign aid and poverty.
To be honest, I feel a little bad for Sarah Palin. I don't think she is nearly ready enough to take on the potential role as Vice President, and she was put on that ticket for reasons other than experience and qualifications. If I thought she was qualified, this wouldn't even be an issue. I want to like her, I really do. It would be great to have an example of an understanding, compassionate woman who is in touch with the issues, a powerful, intelligent one who fights for women's rights all while juggling the important roles of mother and wife. I guess I will need to wait a little longer...
If any of you have noticed this in person, I will now explain why everytime someone mutters the words "Sarah Palin", my typical reaction is to do something like this:
Roll eyes + *sigh* = my blood starts to boil. I can almost feel it.
Forreal, I have irrational hate towards this woman as a politician. I mean I'm sure she's a great mother to her family and would blend in just fine with the PTA and band (and hockey) moms, but this woman's anti-science, anti-environment, and anti-women's/ reproductive rights stance just grinds my fcking gears. My boss at work, a well-off, Orange County civil trial attorney, is pretty much as Republican as one can be; he calls Sarah Palin "the village idiot".
And before someone tells me that this election is about electing the next president and not second-in-command, I am well aware of that. I support many of Obama's policies and would vote for him over McCain, regardless of the other name on either party's ticket. But this post is about Sarah Palin and not Obama, and if you don't like it then GTFO. It just scares me that McCain would choose someone so out of touch on issues as his Vice President. Honestly. Why? It's not because of experience or merit or qualifications or anything that would seem to make sense, that's for sure. To reel in female voters who will vote for her based on her sex? Maybe. If that's the case, that just pisses me off even more if his campaign thinks I will vote for a candidate just because she is a woman without reading the issues. I am not that stupid, and I certainly hope all other female voters aren't either. She is no Hillary. She is no champion of women's rights.
Since there are so many things I could say about why I can't stand Sarah Palin, a short list will have to suffice for now. Feel free to do your own research about these points:
+ On her foreign policy experience: "Alaska has a very narrow maritime border between a foreign country, Russia, and, on our other side, the land-boundary that we have with Canada...our next-door neighbors are foreign countries, there in the state that I am the executive of..." 'Nuff said.
+ "Troopergate" scandal. Abuse of power? Unethical?
+ Although no books were banned from the local library in Wasilla, in 1996 then-mayor Palin had raised the issue of banning books to librarian Mary Emmons at least twice. Emmons flat out opposed Palin each time. Some time later, Emmons was fired, not because of censorship, but because Palin felt that she did not have Emmons' support. Palin then decided to withdraw her termination letter to Emmons after residents rallied behind the librarian and against what they thought was Palin's attempt at censorship.
+Supports drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge , the largest protected wilderness in the United States. I should note that McCain does not even support this. Opposes listing the Polar Bear and Beluga Whale as endangered species and even sued the federal government after the bear was listed as threatened in May.
+Opposes embryonic stem cell research. My bias as a Biosci major may be a factor for me here.
+Claimed that global warming is not man-made, but later claimed that she does not rule out man's influence either (I say damage control by her advisors). Hello - carbon emissions? Deforestation? The meat industry? With her answers to questions about this issue and other ones like foreign policy, she just does not seem to have a clue about important issues that I want my Vice President to be somewhat knowledgeable about. I don't want a "Joe Six Pack" or a hockey mom in office, I want someone exceptional.
+She has stated that she is a proponent of teaching both evolution AND creationism in schools. It has also been reported that she endorsed the teaching of Intelligent Design - and if you've been reading my blog, you know how I feel about that. Although Palin has not necessarily pushed for Creationism in the classroom, I think we should just stick to a separation of church and state. Religion can and should be taught in religion or theology class, but not as science. I also wonder if proponents of teaching creationism alongside evolution would feel the same about the teachings of Buddhism, Hinduism, or Islam in the classroom- it makes me question whether Palin would still follow her own words: "You know, don't be afraid of information"...
+Palin is pro-life, and although I respect others who share that same stance, it's important for me to vote for a pro-choice candidate. This topic will get its own post in the future, focusing on the Global Gag Rule because this policy does not get a lot of publicity but I think it is an important one that deals with women's & reproductive rights, foreign aid and poverty.
To be honest, I feel a little bad for Sarah Palin. I don't think she is nearly ready enough to take on the potential role as Vice President, and she was put on that ticket for reasons other than experience and qualifications. If I thought she was qualified, this wouldn't even be an issue. I want to like her, I really do. It would be great to have an example of an understanding, compassionate woman who is in touch with the issues, a powerful, intelligent one who fights for women's rights all while juggling the important roles of mother and wife. I guess I will need to wait a little longer...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
