August 2006 Weddings
2Vermont
member
Dear Community,
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
Our tech team has launched updates to The Nest today. As a result of these updates, members of the Nest Community will need to change their password in order to continue participating in the community. In addition, The Nest community member's avatars will be replaced with generic default avatars. If you wish to revert to your original avatar, you will need to re-upload it via The Nest.
If you have questions about this, please email help@theknot.com.
Thank you.
Note: This only affects The Nest's community members and will not affect members on The Bump or The Knot.
I still struggle with gay marriage
Dear A06 friends,
I'm going to admit that I still struggle with gay marriage. I read the posts about Prop 8 in E08 and I honestly do not think I could have voted yes.....but I also don't think I could vote No either.
I have read many of your thoughts over these past months....but if you would do me the favor of expressing them here again to help me get a better handle on my feelings about this I would appreciate it.
Thanks.....
And so I say to you, you are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.
Re: I still struggle with gay marriage
I appreciate your honesty.
And, the fact that you would just not have voted either way makes you a classier person than 52% of Californians right now.
I think the thing to remember is that gay marriage is nothing more than two consenting adults who love each other and want to be a part of the same conservative, pro-family tradition that so many Americans are part of. It doesn't diminish the value of other marriages. And it doesn't mean churches have to honor their wishes and perform the ceremony. It just means that they get to have the same joy and happiness that we get from our marriages.
No worries about the Biblical lesson. ;-) I know most of you know where I stand on this when it comes to religion....there is no reason to get into that.
I completely respect you for being honest, and I completely respect you for feeling the way you do. I get that not everyone like the idea of homosexuality or gay marriage, and that is OK.
The problem I have is passing legislation that actually takes away basic rights from people based on their sexual orientation. It doesnt really matter what the right is, marriage or something else, it is still discrimination. Discrimination that is now in our state constitution.
My feeling is that if you dont approve of gay marriage, then you dont have to attend a gay wedding or marry someone of the same sex. No one is going to force that upon you. That doesnt mean that your lack of approval should legislate peoples rights.
I think it's cool you are trying to figure this out for yourself. My tone here is curiosity, so here are some questions for you :
I don't understand why someone else's marriage affects you. I mean, others divorce - does that hurt your marriage? Others cheat. Others swing. Britney Spears has been married twice, once for what was it? 58 hours? Does that affect you?
I'm assuming it doesn't. So if those things don't affect you, why does it bother you about gay marriage?
Ditto ESF. She said it much better than I could.
I think it's great that you are sincerely thinking about this issue.
I support gay marriage because it's just the right thing to do. I know several gay couples (including my uncles) who are in loving committed relationships, some with young babies. To consider them less than a family is wrong. Further, I don't find their relationship to be a threat to my own marriage. I don't think civil unions are adequate because I would not want to call my marriage a civil union, why should they? It smacks of separate but equal and I don't think we should return to this antiquated way of thinking. Plus, it's not even equal. Finally, I understand that some have religious objections to gay marriage, but I don't believe that religion alone should dictate public policy. A law may have religious origins (e.g. murder) but it also must have a basis in logic before it should become the law. There is no logic behind denying same sex couples the right to marry. None.
I think many of the previous posters have explained it very well.
So I just want to add as a mother of a gay son, I want him to have the opportunity to marry the love of his life one day.
I want to add that my view on gay marriage has always been one of acceptance so my son did not change my view. But now it hits home it is even more important than ever.
That sums up how I feel about the issue. It's one of discrimination and has absolutely nothing to do with the church. It's about how some people are denied important legal rights based on their sexual orientation. It's no different than discrimination based on gender, age or race.
I think it's so odd and wrong that my gay friends, neighbors and acquaintances do not have all of the same rights available that I do.
About 5 years ago, I was having a conversation with one of my friends, about our goals and dreams for our lives. Tops for both of us was to fall in love, marry and have a family. For me, all I had to do was find that person. For him, it's not even legal. That conversation forever made me a supporter of legalizing gay marriage.
<a href="http://www.thenest.com/?utm_source=ticker&utm_medium=HTML&utm_campaign=tickers" title="Home D
Ditto virtually everyone. I have a gay BIL, and the two people that I considered to be my "grandparents" (my bio grandparents all died before I was a year old) were a gay couple who were together for 50 years before one died. I have strong feelings about specifically denying a right to someone because of sexual orientation, particularly when it has no bearing on my or anyone else's life.
But I wanted to add - have you lurked at all on the same-sex households board? Right now it's filled with prop 8 posts, but go back a few weeks or months. It's pretty mundane - couples just like me and my H or you and yours - planning weekends and swapping recipes, ranting about in-laws and debating fashion. I can't see why granting marital rights to same sex couples is so objectionable.
Thanks for your honesty.
I am a runner, knitter, scientist, DE-IVF veteran, and stage III colon cancer survivor.
Ditto the others. As truly heartbroken as I am about the way this went down, undecided and looking for more information is never a bad thing.
A few thoughts:
1. Civil marriage has been around a long time. It's not going to be undone. There are all kinds of definitions of marriage, and while each church is entitled to their own, our constitution should not be in the business of defining one church's (or even many church's) definition on everyone else. We Catholics don't believe in divorce. The Catholic Church doesn't recognize it. But under the law, divorce is allowed and recognized for those who do not share our beliefs. I doubt that the Catholic Church will ever recognize gay marriage, at least not in my lifetime, but the state should have their own, secular definition. Just as they marry Unitarians and atheists and yes, Catholics, and even interfaith couples, and blacks and asians and interracial couples, they should marry people of all different sexual orientations.
2. I understand that you struggle with homosexuality, as guided by your faith. While I don't personally agree with the interpretation that the Bible condones loving, monogamous homosexual relationships, I accept that some do. However, I don't think it's debatable that Jesus's message of love and tolerance is much louder and clearer than any condemnation of homosexual acts. The message that the passing of an amendment like Prop 8 sends to those who, regardless of what you believe, feel that homosexuality is an inseparable part of themselves - that message is that we don't accept you; we don't want to acknowledge your love as valid and real; we feel our marriages and our children are threatened by your very existance.
3. St. Francis of Assisi said, "Preach the gospel at all times -- If necessary, use words." I guarantee you, not one single person is ever going to come to Christ and give up homosexuality because the passage of Prop 8 denied them the right to marry. I personally don't believe people can be "prayed straight" so to speak, but I do think that many people (hetero and homosexual alike) will be far more open to the message the Church as to spread if they feel welcomed rather than shunned.
4. I've been thinking about this one the last couple days - the AA civil rights struggle is not a great parallel to this fight. Perhaps interracial marriage, but people of different races cannot physically hide from discrimination, and there is absolutely no discussion over nature vs. choice. I think a better parallel is that of religion. Technically you choose your religion, but it's not like picking out what to wear today. It's something fundamental to who you are, your own truth. Still, we protect religious rights in this country even though religion is not genetic. Imagine if we passed a law that eliminated the right of Mormons to marry because their marriage doesn't fit our definition. No one would stand for that, right?
A friend of a friend posted a great Christian argument against Prop 8 on facebook the other day, but it's long. I'll put it in a separate post.
Adding to the pile, probably nothing else but a ditto of most people at this point.
Countering one of the things people have tried to argue to me against gay marriage:?
Marriage to me is not a religious institution. ?It is a legal union recognized by our state and government of two consenting adults who declare that union. ?I'm not religious, yet my union is still called a marriage. I'm not unioned. ?I'm married. ?And religion had nothing to do with it.
So, why should that legal contract only be between two people of opposite genders? ?Why does the gender of the other half of that union determine whether it can be made? ?In what other legal areas is gender considered? ?Why just this one?
Now, people certainly have a right have a religious ceremony that celebrates that marriage. ?And they have a right to exclude gays from that religious celebration. ?But I don't see why their religious interpretation should be affecting the law for the rest of us. ?Marriage is simply a legal contract in which neither gender nor religion should matter.
Here it is, sorry for the length:
Hi everybody. There?s a lot of focus on this election for the obvious reason of the presidency, I think we can all agree. Record numbers of turnout on both sides, increased media focus, fundraising records being shattered, the electoral map shifting, groundbreaking nominations on both sides?but I think those of us living in California, while we hear plenty, are far more removed from the general election process than someone living in say, Ohio, Florida or Virginia.
We?re one of the safest blue states on the map (although I think we went for Reagan in ?84). Even though we make up about 10% of all the votes and are by far the biggest state in terms of population, neither candidate really uses California for anything other than raising money, or bugging us to drive to Nevada to knock on doors. (Anyone on the Obama campaign?s email list knows what I?m talking about.) So, all this to say, even though Barack Obama and John McCain have brought the largest, youngest, and most diverse groups out of the woodwork, from sea to shining freaking sea, it can be easy to feel like if you live in California, your vote doesn?t matter as much.
But it does. If you?re reading this on Facebook, I?d be willing to bet that you?ve heard of this summer?s California Supreme Court decision, which recognized marriage for same-sex couples. And you?ve probably also heard of Proposition 8, the ballot measure that came into existence almost immediately afterward. On the sample ballot, it reads ?Eliminates right of same?sex couples to marry.? If passed, this law would define marriage in California and legally recognize only heterosexual marriages. In the last few months, a lot of passionate feelings have been raised on both sides of the issue, so let?s clear a few things up. This law is not to decide ?yes? or ?no? on gay marriage, this law is to say that a same sex relationship cannot be termed ?marriage? in the state of California. Marriage for same-sex couples has already been granted through the legal system of the state, and this is a law to, in its own words, ?eliminate? that ?right.? This is an issue of legal rights, not of some imaginary LGBT conspiracy out there conspiring to erase our values and beliefs.
No one is pushing their beliefs on you. I read on a friend?s post on this issue that only 3% of the population is gay and is ?forcing their beliefs? on the other 97% of the population. Now, leaving aside those HUGE assumptions (that that percentage is accurate and that 100% of that 97% of straight people oppose gay marriage) it?s just not true that ?they? are forcing ?their? beliefs on ?us.? Judges, appointed officials who administer the law, acted to protect rights for an alternative lifestyle. One of the problems with California?s referendum laws is that anyone in the state can do things like hang the rights of a minority group (up to 49% of the population) on a simple popular vote (which any veteran of the civil rights or women?s rights struggles would tell you is a bad idea).
But let?s talk about why you shouldn?t vote yes in this popularity contest. Since it?s a change to the California state constitution, there should be a good reason to pass it. I?m arguing against this proposition and not FOR anything other than letting the Constitution stay as it is now, so these will all be reasons why you should vote ?no,? not necessarily in support of gay marriage as an institution or homosexuality as a lifestyle choice.
1. It doesn?t protect marriage. How will redefining a civil marriage under the law protect marriage? The institution of American marriage is not under assault today, at least not more than it has been by its rising divorce rate for the past few decades. (50% of first marriages!) American marriages have been in trouble for a while; the culprit is not homosexuality and never has been. I?ve heard the argument that male or female roommates might get married to each other out of convenience to get lower taxes or health benefits; marriages of convenience happen between heterosexual couples as well, and we?ve never cared before.
2. No one?s forcing YOU to get married or condone being gay. This is where that 97%-3% argument falls to pieces. The fictional 3% aren?t forcing the fictional 97% to get married to people of their own gender, they just want to be able to choose for themselves. No one is forcing you to legitimize homosexuality as a lifestyle, or admit that it comes from genetic rather than environmental factors. It is entirely about the same rights under a country that bills itself as free of religious influence.
3. Here?s a big one. No one is forcing you to deny your Christian belief that homosexuality is a sin. Your church will not be forced to marry same-sex couples or hire same-sex employees, unless MAYBE you somehow receive state funding. (Which I don?t think tax-exempt churches are allowed to do, but I?m not 100% sure)
4. Your kids will NOT be taught that homosexuality is ok in public school if Prop 8 fails. (It has nothing to do with that!)
5. From a strictly legal point of view, marriages offer far more legal benefits to a same-sex couple than a civil union. Power of attorney, legal right of kinship, joint federal income tax filing, etc. Civil unions are NOT the same and this proposition does actually deny people their legitimate rights, for living outside the majority opinion of a marriage (whether or not you want to classify gay marriage as a ?right,? you have to agree that THOSE are rights).
I can?t tell you that I know how Jesus would vote. That would be presumptuous on my part, especially given what I?m about to say. I?ll just have to go with what I?ve come to after a lot of prayer and thinking about the issues in the light of what Scripture says. Your religion can and should influence your vote. THAT isn?t what the separation of Church and State is about. It comes down to voting to specifically forbid someone else a right that?s been extended to them (when it in no way affects you, your beliefs, or your relationship with God) to let those who disagree with the Bible live with all the rights we have, and I can?t in good conscience do that.
If Jesus could vote in a secular state like ours, would he vote to force others to live by his moral code? From what I?ve seen, he led by example and personally called people to follow Him. He gave commandments to ?sin no more? and to ?pick up [your] cross and follow me? to individuals, as God on Earth. He had a more nuanced and complex relationship with the religiously based Jewish law of his day than simply legally forbidding behavior at odds with his teachings. He hung out with and preached to Samaritans and prostitutes, contact with them forbidden or at the very least looked down upon by the believers of his day. He called them to a personal choice to change their lives and to enter into a relationship with Him.
Would he have looked at a ballot in a country that is explicitly non-religious and thought, ?Since these people sin, I will enact laws to make their life more difficult?? I have a hard time visualizing that.
If the gay rights struggle begins to conflict with religious rights, I?ll be up in arms. If the thought police come after Christians for saying apolitically from the pulpit that the New Testament teaches that homosexuality is wrong, a lot of people will get angry. But that?s not what this vote is about. It isn?t about anything near that. It does not directly affect communities of faith, for gays & lesbians to get married, somewhere in the state, so I don?t really feel compelled to stop it. The apostle Paul wrote a lot about sexual immorality in the church. You know what he said about sinners outside the church?
?For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? But those who are outside, God judges.? (1st Corinthians 5:12-13a, NASB) Paul is always adamant about urging Christians to expel unrepentant sinners from their churches, but here he talks about how it?s not our place to judge an unrepentant world.
It?s the church?s job to live as an example to that unrepentant world. It?s the church?s job to protect marriage by having good marriages, not by forbidding the formalization (and equal recognition under the secular law) of thousands of longstanding gay and lesbian relationships. If you want to protect marriage, don?t get married until you?re really ready. If you want to protect marriage, work on having good spousal communication, on spending time and energy on your kids, on your relationship with, and understanding of God, together. Go do some sit-ups or buy those flowers or cook that romantic surprise dinner.
That's what a REAL "Protect Marriage" law would require.
The 2nd question is easiest to answer. ?No, they don't. ?DOMA prevents that. ?So, even legally married couples in the 2 states that currently allow it aren't getting a whole ton of federal benefits.
1. If people have abnormalities or were abused, that's still not their choice. ?But, regardless, think of the statistics that you read. ?#1 is that many come from ex-gay ministries. ?So, they're already self-selecting a no-representative sample. ?And #2 thing of the percentage of the population that is abused. ?And then think of the percentage of the population that is gay. ?There is bound to be some overlap. ?But that does not mean that one caused the other.
My former roommate was in a straight marriage for 12 years. ?His ex-wife knew he was gay b/c they were high school friends. ?Together they tried to overcome it. ?It just didn't work. ?So, if people are strongly motiviated to change, and they think they're going to hell if they don't, yet they stlil can't change, that should speak clearly that it's not a choice. ?I have a few videos that talk about this, from a Christian perspective, if you're interested in them.?
I agree with ESF 100%.
I'm coming at it from a religious perspective too- but the bottom line is that I prefer to live in a country where there is a separation between church and state; otherwise, I subject myself to having my own beliefs legislated. So while it would not be acceptable in my religion for two men to marry each other, I would not vote to enact the tenets of any religion into law.
2V, I appreciate your honesty and openness to other experiences.
I could write a tome on this, but others have expressed most of my thoughts already. I think the main issue here is that gay couples are exactly like you and your husband, or me and my husband. They love each other deeply. They are together because they laugh at the same things, they challenge each other to grow, they support each other, and they want to spend the rest of their lives loving and living with this person.
I'm tearing up as I write this, thinking of my friends.
Two different gay couples I am very close with held ceremonies this year, even though they were not legally allowed to get married. They were like any other wedding -- two people committing to share their lives together for better or for worse. During one of the weddings, each of the grooms committed to marry one another as soon as legally possible. I had tears streaming down my cheek. I have long been a supporter of gay marriage, but to be standing there -- joyous for my friends as they publicly committed to one another -- and recognize the active legal discrimination they face was just stunning. My joy quickly turned to anger at the government, at anti-gay marriage activists, at bigots. I don't know how anyone can impose their religious beliefs on someone else -- much less to shut down two people who love each other and keep them from being able to see each other in the hospital. To keep them from adopting and extending their love to create a family. To keep them from sharing in the joys of marriage. It is fundamentally wrong. It is discrimination. It is something we as a nation should not abide.
Vermont,
I think it's great that you're willing to sit down and listen to all the fronts on this. And I think I can completely understand where you're coming from.
I grew up in a conservative Catholic family; because of logistics, I wasn't able to attend a Catholic school, so my mother's next best option was an evangelical Christian school. I went there from kindergarten through high school. Needless to say, I was taught homosexuality is wrong. That gay people are sinning against the will of God and that one day, they'd pay for those sins.
My views started shifting when I got to college and I actually MET gay people, including one guy who is still one of my good friends. We had a lot of conversations and he was always so honest with me. I'll never forget how he said to me (and he's Catholic too!) "Do you know how much I wish I were straight? How much I prayed growing up that I would become straight? My life is so much harder because I'm gay. I broke my parents' hearts when I came out. Kids in high school picked on me. If I had a choice, there's no doubt in my life I'd be straight. But that's just it--being gay isn't a choice. I didn't choose this. I am this."
Do I still look at Scripture and question things? Of course. But I just think some of the judgmental things I've heard from Christians and Catholics and the one thing I do know is that there is no way Jesus would approve of that.
My senior year of college I met the man who is now my husband. Not even a week after I met him, my friend met his partner. I remember giggling with my friend over all those "firsts"--first date, first time we said I love you, first time we met our significant others' parents. My relationship with my husband ran parallel to my friend's relationship with his partner. It was cool.
But I actually remember the one sobering moment on my wedding day. That I felt heartbroken when I saw my friend and his partner sitting in the church. It felt like a punch in the gut that here I was, able to have this incredible, meaningful moment--to marry the love of my life and my friend, who was just like me, could not.
My friend and his partner are just like my husband and I. They have a house, a dog (okay, we have a cat, lol), jobs, relationship drama, milestones and happiness. I really think it's unfair they can't have a marriage. And I have a hard time now grasping that homosexuality is a sin; just because I don't think my friend can sin by being himself.
I suppose it's one of the things I'll have to sit down and ask God about when I get the chance
That's the personal experience that affected me. Politically, I see discriminating against two consentual adults as an affront. I think there's some blurring of church and state here--most people who I know that are not religious don't have a problem at all with homosexuality. It's those of us that have been brought up in certain religious backgrounds that have questions with this issue...
ETA: I typed too fast up there and said my friend chose to be gay. I was trying to say if he had a choice he'd be straight (according to him).
I really need to proofread before I press post don't I?
Soprano, it is good to hear from you because I know that this was a huge issue for us. Part of this big struggle I have is that I really don't see myself as a bigot, so I'm trying to reconcile my religious beliefs here. Perhaps the only way to do this is to look at this issue from a legal perspective.
I'd like to take this opportunity to again share my pastor's blog entry on gay marriage and the Bible references to homosexuality. I have found his thoughts on this very helpful. It's a Methodist preacher, not a Catholic priest, but it addresses the same verses
http://www.untiedmethodist.com/untiedmethodist/2005/04/the_question_i__1.html
2V, from the perspective of those who are denied rights, you would be a bigot. ?I'm sure it's hard not to take it personally, but think about it from their perspective. ?They'd probably take their loss of rights pretty personally, too.
Think back to racial issues. ?There were many churches trying to claim that it wasn't prejudicial to deny blacks rights. ?They found passages to back them up. ?Yet it's still a prejudicial position to deny rights. ?Even if their intrepretation backs them up. ?That doesn't change the objective position that denying rights to a group of people based on something they're born with is bigotry.?
I'm really glad we can have this dialogue
It's hard for me to understand the other side of this because I see anti-gay work as a personal affront to my friends, and I take personal offense at people doing that work. I understand that they believe it is a sin and an abomination. But I grew up in that world too; as I got older, I came to recognize how narrow and cruel that view is to gay people.
Many people don't grow up with gay people in their family or with gay friends. They are told from an early age that it is wrong. Without a real live gay person to have a relationship with, it is easy for people to assume that Gays Are Different. When someone is Different, it is easier to deny them civil rights.
(Aside: This is why the "other-ing" of Obama was so insidious. Making him into a scary figure -- one we don't know anything about, one who is different from us, who believes differently than we do -- was a disservice to all citizens.)
My wish for all people is that they could live in diverse communities. Diversity of race, religion, sexuality, age... you name it. It is only through exposure to what is different that we can truly learn about others' experiences. My life and world-view would be totally different if I hadn't met one of my best friends when I moved to DC at 22. He happens to be gay. Like umwife, I watched him meet and fall in love with his soon-to-be-husband (yay, CT!!!) I heard about their first dates. The big move-in-together step. The engagement and promise to marry as soon as legally able. I don't know that I would have been against gay marriage, but watching the pain they've gone through, not having it as an option, ensured that I am not just for it, but adamently for it. Anything else is an assault on their civil rights.
I'm listening.....
I think it comes down to: Do you believe in freedom of religion? You can be Christian and vote contrary to Christian ideals. Would you vote for a law that mandated people be baptized before getting a social security number? If no, why not? Technically, if you believe people who aren't baptized go to hell, why would you not vote for this?
"As of page 2 this might be the most boring argument ever. It's making me long for Rape Day." - Mouse
A friend of mine is in this film. ?Another friend started a group called ex-ex-gay. ?For all those people who went through ex-gay ministries and are still gay.
http://www.fishcantfly.com/
There's also this
http://www.forthebibletellsmeso.org/indexa.htm
and there's another that features the two men who started Exodus, one of the largest ex-gay ministries. ?I can't remember the name of it, though.
I think they do try to make a Christian argument for accepting homosexuality. ?And I don't know if you're open to changing your interpretation. ?It's ok if you're not, you've got to go in steps, but those movies really illustrate their experiences, and most of them are strongly devoted Christians, so of course that's part of their story. ?
?
Yeah. ?Ditto.?
Well, maybe I'm hanging around you liberals too long... lol. I still feel very strongly about what my faith teaches me, BUT I am trying to separate civil rights from my religious beliefs (if that makes sense).
Can I just give some massive kudos here to everyone on this thread?
I think this is one of the most grown-up, adult discussions on gay marriage I have come across in a long time.
You A06ers and your brilliance. Love it
One of my complaints about the churches that are taking up the anti-homosexuality angle is that this is *not* what Jesus preached in the New Testament. He teaches to love your neighbor as yourself. He teaches tolerance and kindness and forgiveness. He tells us to judge not, lest we be judged.
I just cannot believe in any savior that would send my friends to hell simply because they happened to love someone of the same gender. And if you've seen friends in loving gay relationships, you'll know that their love is just as deserving of respect as any of ours.
I think there is a great deal of complexity here having to do with the politicization of religion. Abortion and gay marriage are two wedge issues that are intentionally trotted out to drive the strongly religious folks to the polls to vote on their religious beliefs. And I don't believe this happened until the Religious Right hooked up with the GOP. If you put an anti-choice measure on the ballot, people will come out in droves -- and happen to vote for a GOP ticket. Win-win. I don't think we'd see people devoting so much time to gay marriage if it weren't being used as a tool to get voters to show up.