During this week, I saw this video and was amazed at the arguments the man made concerning prop 8. You should watch it!! He brings up startling points I have not even heard before (the issues of marriage and slavery). Although I think it is an extremely controversial issue, it is definitely applied to the conflicts we face in class now. Do we really have free will and what does God become if there is so much evil in the world? He makes points about God being a universal love and how it is applied in the perception of gay marriage. When you see this video, do you think he is right in his point of view? After watching this, I am wondering how the opposite view could support their own claims as well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hey Amy! Aimee... it's the last one right? Regardless, I hope our friendship isn't founded on the basis of how I spell your name :0).
I'm glad you posted this video. Incidentally enough, I watched this video earlier... it's pretty awesome. Sorry, incredibly awesome. I'm in love with the video, let's just say that. It essentially coincides with my personal beliefs on the matter, and love is a huge part of it. It's a universal emotion that we all feel... it's not a systematic thing, it's not mechanical. Because it's something that we all have, I don't think it's fair when one group trivializes your love and doesn't allow you to act on it.
I had a conversation with a friend on prop 8 about a week or two before the election. I used that argument and his simple reply was, "Well it says in Leviticus that it's wrong, so it's as simple as that." It's widely held in the Christian faith, at least from the majority of the people that I've come into contact with, that homosexuality is wrong. Simply because it says so in the bible.
Furthermore, and this is the fascinating part, it's the LOVE that is wrong! To them, that's the sin. Homosexual love just isn't seen as the same kind of love that heterosexuals have, so Olbermann using his compelling and humane argument won't matter because they'll easily say, "Well... it's the LOVE that's the sin. So no... no marriage."
I don't agree at all with that sentiment. I don't care if I'm going against God in that regard too. I can't consciously feel that one's love is worth significantly less than another's.
I was listening to him until he he asked in a negative rhetorical manner "is this what your religion tell you to do?" Who does this guy think he is? And what if it does? If I believe God inspired those who came before me to certain ways of life and I in turn wish to follow that because of my love for God, who am I to go against this; who is he?
He says, "Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice to stand against this" then he says to place it against a message of love. I didn't know he was a theologian so that he can suggest that he could make such comparisons.
But one of the most insulting things he says is that marriage is a statistic. 'Your marriage stands 50/50 chance no matter how much you feel'. I don't consider my marriage a statistic - as if one could quantify love or roll dice on it in a gambling ring; nor do I consider this any kind of justification for gay marriages.
I shudder to think what the future holds if we begin to make policy based on love. What I mean is this. There are plenty of polygamists in the United States who would absolutely love it if they legalized polygamy. These people, so they claim as gays claim, love each other. Where is the outcry here? Why is no one jumping to try to legalize this situation? And what would it mean to say that if one day six or seven people, of different genders, wish to be married to each other as a unit; they too claim they all love each other; they could be fighting for the right to be considered a 6 or 7 people married unit as a regular couple is considered a married unit? They could use everything this guy says as an editorial. They could dig up his Youtube editorial as he did with the Clarence Darrow saying. So in this regard, why don't we expand our minds, let's be liberal, let's allow anything for the sake of love. Can anything be permitted? But perhaps this guy might say, 'that's going too far;' I would like to know what the line looks like that I've crossed that determines that I've gone too far.
yeah, talk about a delayed comment. but it has to be done, so here goes.
i actually posted my thoughts on this issue on one of marlie's previous blogs. to me, the issue is not about love or what is right or wrong (though the Bible denounces homosexuality in the Old Testament, but it also promotes tolerance in the New). to me, it's more about definitions. what does it mean to say "marriage"? for years, it's been a social and legally binding union between a man and a woman.
and the reason it was originated and maintained as "marriage" is because society collectively agrees to identify it as such. now society is changing to adapt to growing homosexual populations and we are in the process of deciding whether or not to EXPAND the definition of marriage to include homosexual unions. but there is already such an institution available to homosexuals called civil or domestic unions (i forget which) that essentially allows the same rights as marriage. so why expand an existing definition when we've created a new one to suit the new situation?
and i'm glad i read our professor's comment above to bolster my case. i've wondered at what point we should draw the line when it comes to marriage, and i'd say it's fine where it is. when people talk about equal rights for everyone, when you get down to specific cases like murderers and polygamists you have to draw the line. but some of the lines seem rather arbitrary, don't they? all the same, it seems that communal agreement is what ultimately determines where these lines of right and wrong are drawn. and as prop 8 showed us, the community has decided in favor of traditional marriage (at least for california).
Post a Comment