?

Log in

No account? Create an account
me

I find it amazing...

... to think that a country which once treated it's majority population as second class citizens through apartheid has managed to overtake the United States with regards to freedom and equality for ALL of it's citizens, and yet...

...the South African parliament passed legislation recognizing same-sex marriages.

It still has to go through some more hoops but it sounds like it's likely to pass without too much more trouble.

GOOD JOB SOUTH AFRICA!

As for the US.... well, twenty some odd states have voted to ban same sex marriages in their state constitutions and it's failed in one single state? Our own president is adamant that we must pass an amendment to the U.S. constitution permanently relieving some of our citizens of rights that the rest of us take for granted. So much for the land of the free and the home of the brave. We've clearly become the land of the self-centered and the home of the hypocritical[1].





[1] - My last post about gay marriage garnered one anonymous post from some coward who didn't like my perspective. I didn't bother to respond to that, but in case their pathetic excuse for a life (online or otherwise) still involves trolling through my LJ, then please take the time and explain to me how people can support DIVORCE and still claim to care about the "sanctity" of marriage? How people can be opposed to abortion and be opposed to birth control? How the people who most evoke Christ to justify their hatred and bigotry are often the ones who are least Christ-like in their actions?

Comments

I can understand supporting divorce and still caring about the sanctity of marriage, depending on your view. A divorce can be a way out of a problematic marriage that isn't a proper expression of the supposedly holy bond.

However, the "sanctity of marriage" is a horrible reason for a law opposing same-sex marriage.
I should have probably elaborated that the question was based on being raised Catholic (a religion that doesn't allow divorces "in the church"). While I agree, that divorce can be the only solution to a "bad" marriage, I find it interesting how so many evangelical Christians take such a hardline stand against gay marriage when their own religion was founded by people who were unsatisfied with specific elements of the Catholic faith (or other protestant faiths as time went on) including the prohibition on divorce.

People were unsatisfied so they broke off and founded their own religions with rules that suited them and that's fine, but to then turn around and be so bitter and angry towards other people is just unfathomable to me. There are more prohibitions in the Bible against eating pork than there are against homosexuality and yet Jimmy Dean doesn't seem to be doing so bad in the Bible Belt. IIRC divorce was never portrayed positively in the Bible and yet a lot of Protestants accept it (seemingly because it's convenient for them to have that way out, not because it's morally correct or approved of in the Bible) and yet these same people turn around and wrap their vitriol within terms like "the sanctity of marriage" and they mine the Bible for any scrap of text that might bolster their arguements (while blithely ignoring the parts that don't suit their purposes).

I just don't understand how that works other than to acknowledge those people as hypocrits of the worst sort.
I agree with all of that. I just... I won't use the "but you allow DIVORCE!" card against those who would deny homosexuals a state sanctioned marriage. :)

It's a shame to see so many of those who claim to follow the teachings of Jesus completely ignore his teachings of tolerance.
Well to me divorce comes to mind so quickly because it seems like the antithesis of the "sanctity of marriage."

Matthew 19:6 - "Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder."

If marriage is so sacred then how can they allow anything that dissolves that union and if they allow something like that then how can gay marriages possibly be worse? If anything, I would think that extending the bonds of marriage so that more people could enjoy that state would be a Good Thing (tm).

Keep in mind though that all that is just me thinking aloud about the "religious" angle on the sanctity of marriage thing. Secularly, I think any two people should be allowed to form a legal union of some sort to share rights, responsabilities, and tax breaks ;). I just really wish I could understand how people come up with some of the interpretations they do and how they can be so persistent about how they see those things that I just can't.

PS

personally I like the suggestion of removing "marriage" from the law books entirely. If it's such a hard thing for some people to accept, make marriage a purely religious, symbolic, non-legal thing (just like confirmations, last rights etc...) and create a civil union type arrangement with legal rights and responsabilities for any couple who want to get married regardless of religious affiliation, sexual orientation, or gender.

Then you could let all people get "married" in whatever church they chose and make them enter into a civil union/partnership at the courthouse if they wanted the rights and responsabilities of being united in the eyes of the law.
See, I think the big problem is that the people who are most angry and bitter towards "teh gays" are the ones who secretly harbor more than a little envy for people who live their lives the way they want to and are mostly happy for it (with maybe a bit a latent homosexuality thrown in to realy fuck with their small pious brains). These are probably sad, bitter, people who never lived up to their own dreams/expectations and now need to fuck up someone else's life to feel like they've accomplished something with their own pathetic lives.


And it's always nice to hear that the good ol' USA is behind MOTHER FUCKING SOUTH AFRICA when it comes to civil liberties. Makes me reeeeeel proud.

Aaaaamen brother :)