Wednesday, October 15, 2008

I found this video on my sister-in-law's blog and I thought it was excellent. I really don't think I have to say anything more!


Anonymous said...

Gays & Lesbians should have the same right as the rest of us & that includes marriage, etc. If you read the prop more carefully, you have the right to remove your child from a class room if something is being taught that you don't agree with. It isn't fair to judge others! Get your facts straight!

Andy said...


I appreciate your comment. I hope that you read further in this blog, because it was written specifically for someone like you. Prop 8 is not about judging others - rather, it is about maintaining a norm in our society that has been essential in the health and success of individuals and communities. Legalizing same-gender marriage will undermine religious freedoms and family rights. For those like you who think it's just a matter of live and let live, please read on.

By the way, did you just make the part about Prop 8 saying you can remove a child from class at school? Prop 8 doesn't address school issues at all - it just defines the institution of marriage in the California constitution. The issue about what is taught in schools is a consequence of legalizing same-gender marriage, not part of the wording of Prop 8. If someone argues that parents can take their children out of class, have them read the articles about the man in Massachussettes who was jailed for opposing what was taught in his child's classroom.

Anonymous said...

HI Andy, I can appreciate your stance and your steadfast beliefs, however, your very arguemnet is, in itself a contradiction. You write, "...undermine religious freedoms and family rights". do family rights not apply to all types of families? and, regardless of your religious affiliations or denominations, whether the bible, Koran or book of Mormon simply mankind's interpretations of the word of god.

In my opinion this is the same religious subjectivity that has lead driven the great wars and in human history. from the Crusades to Iraq, it is the religious interpretations of the few that lead to the pain and agony of the masses.

Again, i mean no offense to any reader here, but i say that if we stopped trying to impose our interpretations of the word of god on each other, and realize that we are all leaves birthed from different branches on the same tree, we would all be much better off, whether gay, straight, Mormon, Muslim or Jew.

Andy said...


Thanks again for your comment. To respond, my argument is not a contradiction. A "family" is a multi-generational group of related people. Although not all families follow the ideal, which is a father and a mother who raise their offspring together, that does not mean we should not continue to do everything we can to preserve that ideal. It is "ideal" because of the well-documented benefits it gives to individuals raised in those families, and by extension, to all of society.

There is no contradiction in the assertion that family rights are being taken away. The same-gender marriage movement has already encroached upon the rights of parents to decide when their own children should be taught about sexuality, and WHAT they should be taught (see articles about the father from MA). They are fighting for the minds of OUR children.

Furthermore, your broad generalizations about the pain of the masses coming from religion are utterly unsupportable. The fact that there are instances in the past and present where religion has been used as a vehicle for oppression does not categorically make religion oppressive, nor does it mean that the suffering in the world is caused by religion. This country is founded on religious conviction ("we hold these TRUTHS to be self evident" - that's a completely different position than the morally relativistic position from which you argue).

Furthermore furthermore, it is not Christians who are trying to impose their religious beliefs on others here. The encroachment in this issue is coming from the homosexual activists who want to redefine marriage for EVERYBODY. When same gender marriage is legalized, marriage means something other than what it has meant since the dawn of time. That is unacceptable.

Furthermore furthermore furthermore, if we're a morally relativistic society like you say we should be, then at least you have to let the line between right and wrong be drawn by the voice of the people, not by 4 people (the California Supreme Court judges) who decide that they want to redraw that line in a different place than the 4 million people who had already drawn it where they felt it belonged (those who voted for Prop 22 in 2000). Do you understand that point? To use your language, the same-gender marriage agenda is seeking to "impose their interpretations" of marriage upon everyone else, NOT the other way around.

Finally, Prop 8 is not about spreading prejudice. We can tolerate each other. Nobody arguing for Prop 8 has claimed that homosexuals don't have the right to live next door, say hi to you over the fence, come to your house for dinner, etc. What we are saying is that they don't have the right to redefine the definition of family for all of society.

Anonymous said...

I have to say i can appreciate your conviction! furthermore, furthermore, my apologies as my intention was not to be offensive in any furthermore way.

Firstly, your new stance referring to marriage as an ideal does turn away from your original argument. "maintaining a norm in our society...undermine religious freedoms..." not that it is bad to examine all perspectives of the argument, but is your position on marriage a foundation or ideal?

Secondly, I find it laughable with this whole scare campaign about corrupting the minds our children. is sheltering them from reality going to make them better deal with this issue as they grow to be adults?

As for your retort on religion, i think it best that we leave that one alone. i can see that you are very adamant in your defense and i would not want to cause any undue conflicton based upon your beliefs... hey isn't that kind of what Yes on prop 8 would do for the alternative lifestyle community?

I also appreciate you bringing the constitution in to this, though i do believe your position here to be a bit fruitless. America was founded by people who wanted to flee persecution, so you make a great point... but who are we to now become the persecutors.

My point is this, in the end it is not about school curriculum or bureaucratic definitions of what marriage is, and personally it makes no difference to me whether prop 8 passes or not. my child is going to learn about homosexuality at some point, and i doubt that Homo101 will become a standard part of grade school curriculum. but if people could just become free, analytical thinkers, and not take every word for face value, whether it be a bible or a history book, a preacher or a teacher, only then would we all see that there really is no reason why we should segregate or deny the rights of people based on religion, race, gender, sexual preference or any other difference one can interpret.

Again, just my thoughts, but i do appreciate your stance.

Andy said...

I respect your stance as well. I agree that tolerance and freedom to make the choices that comprise one's lifestyle are important. What I can't understand is why I either can't communicate to you or you don't care that there are more liberties denied by legalizing same-gender marriage than otherwise. The acceptance and tolerance you seem to advocate is only a one-way tolerance. If you had 6 children, and you were going to let them define what it meant to be your child, then what would you do if 5 of them said that they wanted it to mean what it had always meant, but one said that it should mean that you stay out of his room, you provide cigarettes for him to smoke in his room if he so desires, and that you provide him the option of not going to school, what would you do? Would you define the relationship the way that your 1 child said?

Remember, you can't have two definitions. Defining the relationship the way your one child wanted to define it would respect the desires of that one child, but it would trample the rights of the others.

Prop 8 is the same way. Voting no on 8 would be a vote for one-way tolerance. Homosexuals already have the right to pursue their lifestyle free of any prejudice or sanction. Like that one child in my example, a yes vote on 8 is saying to those who choose the same-gender lifestyle that they are welcome to live that way, but we're not going to change the definition for everyone else.

Anonymous said...

Hello again Andy,

I really do enjoy dueling on this, and find your conviction to be quite admirable.

Your last argument was a bit dizzying but a good one.

In all probability the deviant child #1 would probably start smoking pot, pick up the guitar, become famous and end up supporting the other 5 children:)

all jokes aside i do understand your view, i just believe it to be a bit antiquated, not wrong in any sense, simply antiquated.

at the beginning of the last century no woman in America believed they would every be able to vote or become a high level CEO. 70 years ago no African American would have believed they would be seen as equals, let alone just weeks away from potentially becoming the president of one of the greatest societies in all of human history.

The plight for the gay community is much in the same civil liberties chasm. 70 years ago there weren't too many white fathers who would want their children sitting next to a black child in school... i can only imagine that during the civil rights movements the "save the children" argument was used there as well... it is such a good plan B!

Gay rights are an inevitable truth that we will come to fruition. As for prop 8 being the catalyst... we shall see!

Societies have to adjust for the sake of progression just as there are now Women preachers in church or Black Presidential candidates. And, every time these adjustments reach the tipping point there are advocates and there are opponents.

You keep fighting the good fight, and as for me, I'll watch idly by as it makes no difference to me personally, and well see next month.

Again i respect you greatly Andy, and enjoyed this exchange. Perhaps we can match wits again in the future.

My Very Best Regards!