I was so shaken by the news of Maggie’s illness on Friday evening that I didn’t start on all the chores I wanted done before Awesome Nephew came to take care of Dad yesterday until midnight. By the time I was finished, I just had time to shower and dress before leaving for the Restoring Honor rally so I could help GOProud pass out stickers from 8:30 to 9:30 am at the Smithsonian Metro stop. When I got home I couldn’t sleep until after seeing Dad to bed, so I was up for around 36 hours. Instead of napping this afternoon, I’m taking Dad to an Ironbirds game, so I won’t write about the Restoring Honor rally until tomorrow when I’ve had more sleep and I feel better. All I will say about it right now is that it is a surreal experience to hear speaker after speaker talk about liberty, equality, justice for all and unalienable rights when they are passionately committed to ensuring that I don’t have any of those things because I am a lesbian. I left early after Alveda King worked a shot at gay equality into her speech. The exceptions to this were Gov. Palin and Glenn Beck, who both seem to find the high road — especially Gov. Palin. I am more grateful to her for that than ever.
Comments are closed.
“…when they are passionately committed to ensuring that I don’t have any of those things because I am a lesbian. ..”
It’s like I’m always screeching and screaming, both internally and with other people: P.J O’Rourke is right. There is NOTHING more conservative than the desire to marry, maybe raising some kids and to serve one’s country. Next thing you know, we’ll want balanced budgets, reasonable taxes, freer markets, school vouchers and secure borders…
But yeah, I think Mrs. Palin and Mr Beck get it. The others are all the more galling because they’re so eager to nail themselves to crosses for their religion, political orientation, race etc.
My prayers are going up for your beautiful friend Maggie. I am eager to read your account of the rally. You probably had a quieter day than us, we went to a four-year-old’s birthday party at a McDonald’s playland. I’m still in shock.
When you see your friend Maggie, please tell her that her joy of life and love for her friends simply radiates in that picture.
Peter,
Thank you! This morning I explained to Maggie who you are and read your comment to her — she really loved it!
Cynthia
Cynthia:
This is my first time to your great blog. I will be back.
I think that you have a long row to hoe when it comes to the religous right and gay marriage.
While I am personally against gay marriage I do believe that it will happen in my lifetime. I accept that and will not get myself all twisted over it.
Personally I would rather see the government get out of marriage altogether and let it stand as a religous institution as it was originally intended to be.
I do understand that there must be much frustration on your side as you feel that you are being inhibited and your true feelings are not accepted. Not a happy place to be I am sure. I don’t believe that being gay is a choice or disorder as some sadly refer to it as. You have the right to be who you are.
My point is that people like Avedia King will never change her mind; there is no point getting upset about it. Her convictions run deep and she believes that she has the Gospels on her side.
I hope your friend is doing ok and having the least amount of discomfort as possible.
just a conservative girl,
Welcome, and many happy returns. We really don’t need for anyone to change their beliefs or religion regarding gay equality. But we DO need social conservatives to acknowledge the supremacy of the U.S. Constitution, which protects gays from having other people’s religions imposed on us through the government to force us into second-class citizenship. The U.S. is not a theocracy.
Marriage is a contract and therefore subject to government regulation. Also, marriage is constantly being re-defined AND each religion has its own definition of marriage. If you will read my other posts on the subject, you will find more on how the church that is fighting gay equality the hardest — the Mormon Church — has THREE definitions of marriage and can’t wait for the day it can resume polygamy, which it calls “plural marriage.” By the way, Mormons define what all non-Mormons think of as “traditional marriage” as spiritually dead. If you are married but aren’t in a Mormon celestial marriage, that means they define YOUR marriage as spiritually dead.
Cynthia
I do not know a single Mormon who wants to resume polygamy. That is an extremely broad statement and you are indicting an entire people, which is seemingly what you are trying to fight against, yes? Although, if you read Judge Walker’s ruling on Prop 8, he may make a case for plural marriage, because as he stated that one cannot prove nor disprove that homosexuality is an inborn trait or a chosen lifestyle, one cannot discriminate against something that is not behavioral but natural in birth. Therefore, the bi-sexual could not technically be denied the right to marry one of each sex because it is not behavioral, but natural, and to limit his or her right to marry would inflict on his or her constitutional rights.
I understand that you are passionate about this, and as a lesbian, I do not stand with you in this fight. I will fight for civil unions, but not gay marriage because I do not support it. You can attack social conservatives if you wish, but I am sure you would find more allies among them if you approach them with your argument, rather than impugning them as if they are against gays because they are against gay marriage. I would also be careful when you only notate social conservatives as implying that only conservatives are against gay marriage and that all of them are religious. I personally know of liberals and conservative athiests who do not support gay marriage. If you are fighting for gay marriage, you are going to have to fight against everyone who stands in its way, which I suppose, would include me.
This is just my opinion and you are free to respond in whatever manner you wish. I am not attacking you, I have nothing against your right to believe and fight for gay marriage, but I think the better route would be to have evidenciary support, rather than idicting and somewhat attacking a religion, a church, and its people.
Holly,
You need to read more of my blog for my response to most of your statements. Regarding the resumption of polygamy, only one Mormon has to want it for it to resume: the Mormon prophet. Since resuming polygamy will increase the power and wealth of his church, there is little reason to believe he would not have a revelation in favor of polygamy the instant it is safe to do so.
I haven’t written my reaction to the Restoring Honor Rally yet, or finished my book on gay equality where I will be presenting my case more fully. But a more accurate name for the Restoring Honor Rally would be the Establishing Theocracy Rally.
I support social conservatives totally in their love of God.
Cynthia
Cynthia,
I have read your blog and that’s why I commented. I support people’s belief in God as well and I also support the fact that they have a right to voice their opposition to gay marriage without being against gays. I respectfully say to you, that you do not carry this attitude. As a lesbian, I read what your posts against those that do not support gay marriage and even I am taken back by your anger at times. Most people I know, I would say 80-percent do not support gay marriage, not because they want to deny equal rights, because all are in favor of Civil Unions, but because they object to the use of the term marriage, which for them is a religious covenant between God in a Union that He created between one man and one woman. For them and I am included in this, we want government out of marriage completely, because if anything marriage was copted by the government for tax purposes.
You did not address the concerns of Judge Walker’s ruling. I think you are giving too much prominence to the Mormon church in polygamy. If there was a religion that would try to invoke polygamy, I would bet on Islam before Mormonism.
When B. Daniel Blatt of the Gay Patriot wrote of his support for Civil Unions and thought the gay community should go that route, you wrote a scathing piece against him. Is there a reason to divide when maybe we can find a common ground or simply agree to disagree?
On other issues I stand with you in the Conservative movement. On this particular issue though, I will not. We will agree to disagree.
Holly,
I have many posts explaining why civil unions are not acceptable. I will provide additional explanations in my forthcoming book.
Daniel Blatt never misses an opportunity to condemn the gay community and sell gays out for his own advantage. He incites hatred against gays and lesbians by conservatives. I object to that.
You don’t understand the Mormon Church very well. My bet is that the prophet will let Islam do all the heavy lifting to get polygamy legalized. Then he will have his revelation imposing it on the Mormon faithful.
I do appreciate your courtesy and willingness to keep reading here even when there are issues on which we disagree.
Cynthia