Redefined Marriage? Grow Up
Ugh. My least favorite Mormon in all the world is getting under my skin. A woman- who will remain nameless- is complaining.
Homosexuals are going to redefine her marriage.
How? I can't even imagine how my being married in MA for the last five years- legally, we've been together much longer but with no rights- has had any effect on her in NY. Did her wedding ring turn green? Because if it did it might be from all that preaching and forgetting about the lack of piety in her early years.
I mean, she did enough to hurt her own marriage. Don't go pointing fingers at me. And there is that little thing about living in glass houses...
Did her husband go limp? Go buy some Viagra. That's not about my marriage, that's about age. Sorry, it happens. Well, not to me, mind you.
How? I don't get it. But she gets to redefine my marriage. That's okie dokie.
Her son, a brilliant young man who is a Mormon, too, has claimed that Mormons only make up 2% of California's population and clearly, we should be looking at the Blacks and Latinos.
Love that. Pass the buck.
Oddly, the "NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund, Asian Pacific American Legal Center and two other groups asked the state Supreme Court on Friday to issue a stay preventing the ballot initiative approved by voters last week from taking effect.
The petition is the fourth seeking to have the measure invalidated. But it's the first to argue that the court should step in because the gay marriage ban sets a constitutional precedent that could be used to undermine the rights of racial minorities."
I guess they don't agree. And neither do I. He called for rational discussion. That's nice but when you've stripped me of my rights? I'm not calm. I'm angry. While I've called to stop marching on churches? I believe we should be taking to the streets, day in and day out.
He can be calm because no one is taking his rights away. No one is threatening his family. I love that on his CV he does not list his BA from BYU. Afraid of discrimination? Maybe no one really wants a lecture on moral development from a Mormon?
And there is the ultimate irony. I have always stuck up for the Mormons. I have known too many who were just run of the mill folks, no magic underwear, no grain in the basement and no polygamy.
Nice to know it was clearly a one way street.
It is wrong to vote on rights. You cannot give minorities different laws. It is a violation of the Constitution.
I don't want to throw mud. I just want my rights.
I don't want to be defined solely as "lesbian" any more than she wants to be defined only as "Mormon." We are both so many other things. I don't want my rights hinged on a single aspect of who I am, and I'm certain she doesn't either.
But here we are.
Seriously... redefined her marriage? Grow up. Look in the mirror. Nothing has changed. Stop trying to redefine mine.
Homosexuals are going to redefine her marriage.
How? I can't even imagine how my being married in MA for the last five years- legally, we've been together much longer but with no rights- has had any effect on her in NY. Did her wedding ring turn green? Because if it did it might be from all that preaching and forgetting about the lack of piety in her early years.
I mean, she did enough to hurt her own marriage. Don't go pointing fingers at me. And there is that little thing about living in glass houses...
Did her husband go limp? Go buy some Viagra. That's not about my marriage, that's about age. Sorry, it happens. Well, not to me, mind you.
How? I don't get it. But she gets to redefine my marriage. That's okie dokie.
Her son, a brilliant young man who is a Mormon, too, has claimed that Mormons only make up 2% of California's population and clearly, we should be looking at the Blacks and Latinos.
Love that. Pass the buck.
Oddly, the "NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Mexican-American Legal Defense Fund, Asian Pacific American Legal Center and two other groups asked the state Supreme Court on Friday to issue a stay preventing the ballot initiative approved by voters last week from taking effect.
The petition is the fourth seeking to have the measure invalidated. But it's the first to argue that the court should step in because the gay marriage ban sets a constitutional precedent that could be used to undermine the rights of racial minorities."
I guess they don't agree. And neither do I. He called for rational discussion. That's nice but when you've stripped me of my rights? I'm not calm. I'm angry. While I've called to stop marching on churches? I believe we should be taking to the streets, day in and day out.
He can be calm because no one is taking his rights away. No one is threatening his family. I love that on his CV he does not list his BA from BYU. Afraid of discrimination? Maybe no one really wants a lecture on moral development from a Mormon?
And there is the ultimate irony. I have always stuck up for the Mormons. I have known too many who were just run of the mill folks, no magic underwear, no grain in the basement and no polygamy.
Nice to know it was clearly a one way street.
It is wrong to vote on rights. You cannot give minorities different laws. It is a violation of the Constitution.
I don't want to throw mud. I just want my rights.
I don't want to be defined solely as "lesbian" any more than she wants to be defined only as "Mormon." We are both so many other things. I don't want my rights hinged on a single aspect of who I am, and I'm certain she doesn't either.
But here we are.
Seriously... redefined her marriage? Grow up. Look in the mirror. Nothing has changed. Stop trying to redefine mine.
posted by Sara at 4:54 PM
19 Comments:
"Her son, a brilliant young man who is a Mormon, too, has claimed that Mormons only make up 2% of California's population and clearly, we should be looking at the Blacks and Latinos."
Total Karl Rove. We don't play his game and bust up our alliances. We play our game and bust up his alliances.
Since Mormons are only 2% of the CA population, let's put up an initiative to take away their right to marry. Betcha it'll pass.
Anybody wants to put us in a box, we break the box. They go on with their copypasta rants about evil liberals, I say I'm not a liberal, I'm a radical. They try boxing you as a lesbian, tell them you're a radical feminist lesbian mother fund manager who will turn their assets to dung.
Take it to the limit of their imagination and overflow it.
/me is still pissed off today's rally in Huntsville got canceled. I so don't belong here in Alabama.
that's funny because I think you are right. put mormon's rights up and they would not pass.
which is why we don't vote on minorities rights.
I am ALL about the boycott. And writing letters, too. "This person who works for gave a significant amount of money to Prop 8. And therefore you get no money from me. Ever again."
The MSM is covering, it too :) All the majors have stories about the gay backlash. Naturally the LDS nutters are screaming that we are bigots. Puh-leeze.
Heheheh I have no ideaaa whoo you could be talking abooout ;-)
This comment has been removed by the author.
"Which is why we don't vote on minorities' rights."
Some people have no idea at all about how"Vox populi, vox dei" was viewed in the Christian world:
"And those people should not be listened to who keep saying the voice of the people is the voice of God, since the riotousness of the crowd is always very close to madness." - Alcuin, 798 CE
Here's a cookie for the boys. Trane's "Giant Steps" lovingly transcribed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kotK9FNEYU
Your opinion of Coltrane is certainly better than mine, but my take on him is that he was a total club rat and studio rat. He wanted nothing more than to play. Stick a pin in him and out comes music.
[Sorry for jumping the rails. I seem to gave misplaced my off button. Cheers,]
uh, suz, so much for the said person being anonymous...
Ian said the same thing you can remove my comment if you want it was late lol. And hell the damage is probably done anyway.
ttfn
Sara,
As the quasi-anonymous son of your least favorite Mormon, let me clarify my comments, which you are misrepresenting:
First, I don't "claim" Mormons make up 2 percent of the population -- it's a fact. You can look it up (most easily by searching "percent mormon" on the sfgate.com website and looking in the several stories than mention it).
My second, related, point was that African American and Hispanic voters played a much larger role in passing Prop 8. This isn't "passing the buck," it's math.
If you want to follow the following discussion, see the exit polling data at:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/polls/#CAI01p1
African-Americans, drawn to the polls in greater than usual numbers by Obama's candidacy (they made up 10% of the CA electorate this year), overwhelmingly voted for Prop 8 (70% to 30%).
The same is true (though to a lesser extent) for Hispanics. They voted 53-47 for Prop 8 and made up 18% of the CA electorate this year.
If you take the two groups together--comprising a whopping 28% of the electorate--they went 59% for Prop 8. This is an enormous margin.
By comparison, even if every LDS person had voted against Prop 8 (and believe it or not, many did), it still would have passed.
After all, it passed by nearly 5 points overall; nearly as big a spread as what most are calling an Obama landslide.
So to clarify, my intention was not to "pass the buck," but rather to attempt to explain why Prop 8 passed using the relevant data. It's no surprise that Latter-day Saints have been targeted though. They are easy targets. (Protesting outside black churches is not exactly good for PR!)
Finally, It's fine to disagree--that's what people do in a democracy. But please at least take the time to get correct facts. These are sensitive issues for both sides, and we all have a responsibility to be civil, honest, and fair. Selectively using evidence to rile up our own team serves no one's long term interests.
And yes, I have temporarily taken my BYU BA off my CV. Ironically, your reaction shows exactly why such a thing is necessary! Discrimination indeed. You don't even know how I voted but you have assumed it. I think that's what's called pre-judice.
Quasi-anonymous son, no one disputes that the facts are as you say, in contrast to the claims of church vandalism and of ministers being forced to perform marriages if Prop 8 had failed, which are, quite simply, lies. I don't dispute your facts at all.
But one great question remains: why are you asserting them in this conversation? What is the goal you want to achieve?
Shouldn't you tell us?
Black churches did not pump millions and millions of dollars into the campaign- the Mormons did.
And answer Bob's questions...
funny thing, you seem to read and be pissed about what you want- didn't notice I asked people to stop marching on the church, did ya? or does that not fan your self righteous flame?
This comment has been removed by the author.
Well my main objective, to be honest, was not to have my comments misrepresented second hand!
I wouldn't actually say I have a goal on this issue. Unlike many people, I am approaching this more as a an analyst than as a partisan. (That's my job, after all. I'm certainly not a "stereotypical Mormon" on this issue, if that's what you're implying!) I only get riled up when people misrepresent what I say.
A follow up. Of course many individual Mormons gave lots of money to the yes on 8 campaign, just as many individual gays (from out of state) gave lots of money to the no on 8 campaign. See this recent article from the SF Chronicle.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/11/16/BAJG144PTB.DTL&hw=wealthy+gays&sn=001&sc=1000
People back causes they believe in. No surprise. While we might disagree, nothing even remotely illegal or in violation of the tax code took place.
On the contrary, Sara, I am very grateful that you have called for people to stop marching on churches. Your call and others like it seems to have worked -- a fact for which I am also grateful.
My only anger here is not about gay marriage at all. It's only about being personally misrepresented and mocked. I don't think anyone likes that, gay or straight.
So, I just came across your blog looking for a different blog, and couldn't help but read and comment on the first entry about being peaceable, and then I went on to read this one. Anyhow, I wanted to tell you I'm Mormon and I hope your able to keep the good open view it sounds like you've had in the past about people who's faith is LDS.
Like you said that's only one aspect of the person, not all they are. I can totally understand what your saying and how it's breaking your heart. Sounds like your a wise person and a fabulous mom, (not that you need some random Mormon stranger telling you that, but thought I would anyhow). Take care.
sv, It's far more than just individual Mormons. If that's what you're being told, you'd better find out. Or do you know the facts already and prefer not to tell us?
I'm sick of Mormons being professional whiners and victims. If you're proud of your church, you'd better stand up and take responsibility for that pride in the things the church does.
And why did you specifically mention Blacks and Latinos? Do you seriously want to remind us of your church's unsavory record with African-Americans?
If Mormons stop trying to control other people, we'll start loving you again. Deal?
Bob,
It's pretty obvious why I "specifically" mentioned African-Americans and Latinos -- without them, Prop 8 wouldn't have passed. I thought that's what we were trying to explain? Did you read my comment? Did you follow the link to the CNN polling data?
It's pretty obvious, on the other hand, why YOU are glad I brought it up: to tar me with the brush of racism. Nice try. I don't think it will work. Ad hominem is always a good strategy if you're out to win at all costs rather than to have a productive discussion.
And, btw, when you start requiring Catholics, members of black congregations, and everyone else to "own" every aspect of what their church(es) do, they we can have this conversation again. It's obvious to me you are just prejudiced against Mormons. In fact, any reasonable person can certainly see that.
no, I won't allow bashing here. it's not okay.
was I frustrated when I wrote this? yes. I am so sick of having this argument. all I want is my rights, thank you, and then I'm really prefer to focus on public education.
without it, we can't have a democracy.
you can't lump everyone together, bob. you can't.
we have a lot of churches we need to go visit. to share our stories.
when I mentioned the lack of BYU, I meant is as a bridge. I know what it's like to be fired for being gay. having your job at risk because you are Mormon is no more acceptable.
Like the protests that turned violent? we cannot make two wrongs equal right.
the Black and Latino population, while voting for Prop 8- no question- did not fund prop 8 with millions.
and millions.
therein lies the specifically generated ire.
Thanks, Sara.
For what they're worth, here are my thoughts on the "money issue":
The money argument is fine as far as it goes, but I don't see why people aren't allowed to give money to support their point of view. It's a first amendment right -- freedom of speech -- for private citizens to be able to donate to causes they believe in. Exercising that right should not be cause for a backlash of hatred. Disagreement? Sure. Vilification? No.
Furthermore, according to this AP article, only $2.6 million of $37.6 million in total spending came from Utah.
http://cbs5.com/local/proposition.8.spending.2.855582.html
Judgments about how much total money came from Mormons are only guesses, since people aren't required to disclose their religious affiliations when they donate. My guess is that while a lot of big donors were LDS, the total LDS spending was well below half. (And as I commented here earlier, out of state gays and lesbians donated millions to No on 8. So this argument is not an argument from principle. The goal of the argument is to rule out the Yes on 8 position a priori.)
Finally, the fundraising totals for both sides were essentially equal: $38 million for yes and $36 million for no. No one "bought" this election. (I would argue that the main reason Mormons are being targeted is mainly because they are a politically cost-free target.)
So this is why I focus on the voters. The money issue was even, so it was ultimately those who voted for Prop 8 who made it happen.
That is, unless you want to argue that the people who voted for it weren't smart enough to make decisions for themselves? That they are not responsible, somehow, for their votes?
But I sincerely hope that's not a road any of us wants to go down.
Post a Comment
<< Home