It's not often that Kent tells me something I should blog about. But his parents called us the other day to tell us about a special meeting the Church members in California attended. It was about Proposition 8.
The LDS Church generally has stayed out of political matters. Every election year we are reminded to vote for whichever candidate we personally feel upholds our individual values. We are never, ever told "vote for so and so" or even "don't vote for so and so."
But that doesn't mean that the Church cannot get involved in politics. When something is so important to our faith and our beliefs and our freedom to practice our religion, we get involved. And we get very involved.
Because, as Americans, it is our privilege to let our voices be heard.
What is so painful about this matter is that the people's voices WERE heard, and California voted against the legalization of gay marriage. But then a handful of judges took it upon themselves to act against the interests of the majority. And now we have to speak again. And we have to speak louder.
So, although I don't live in California and I can't vote on this matter, I am getting involved. I am standing up for the protection of marriage between a man and a woman as it is the fundamental unit of society. I have donated money to the cause. I have blogged about this before. I'm blogging about it again. I'm going to participate in a call center organized by the Church up here at school (in Idaho!) to call voting members of California and let them know how important it is that we stand up for what we know is right.
Please stand with us, and do whatever you can to help our voices be heard. Marriage is sacred, and we need to protect it.
27 comments:
You guys are great-
What a wonderful idea to use college students to help with the calling-
You will be blessed :}
I respect that your religious tradition has its own set of values and beliefs. In fact greatly admire the LDS church and their family values. However I'm truly trying to understand why there is a need to dictate your beliefs on others. The lives and marriages of others are of no harm or threat to your church, your family, or your marriage.
The California supreme court wasn't acting against the majority, they were standing up for a constitutional standard of equal rights for everyone under the law.
I hope that california as a state continues to respect the right for all individuals to share in the benefits of marriage, and can think of no legal reason why they should not.
Anonymous,
Thank you for your response. First of all, we are not trying to dictate what others believe. As a church, we have always practiced respect for other's opinions and beliefs.
We feel so strongly about this because we feel so strongly about marriage. We believe it is an eternal union designed by God. And our fears are that over time, greater acceptance of nontraditional marriage will be demanded of all people, and this could impact the ability of any religion to teach and practice its beliefs. If our church continues to teach that marriage is only between a man and a woman, then we will be, in essence, teaching against the laws of our country, which is something we don't want to have to do. So, our freedom of practicing our religious beliefs can, in fact, be affected.
Also, Proposition 8 will not hurt the unions of gays and lesbians. They will still recieve the benefits of their unions; we are just asking that they don't try to call it marriage, because marriage, to us, is something different.
And finally, we do not want to have our children taught these things in the public schools.
If you want more information as to how we feel and why, please go to www.preservingmarriage.org.
Thank you for your response. I'll look at the link you provided.
I think we'll just have to disagree on this one, but I truly thank your for your willingness to be in dialogue about this.
I looked at the link you provided and hope you don't mind but I do have a few objections to the points you raised.
You state that your church doesn't want to have to teach against the laws of the nation, but I would argue two things. First, these are state laws, so only LDS churches in California, Massachusetts, and as of yesterday Connecticut would be directly impacted by this. The federal law is actual in line with the teachings of your church under the Defense of marriage act (DOMA). So the LDS church wouldn't actually be teaching against the nations law in this instance, just a few state laws.
Second, it is my understanding that not only the LDS church but many religious groups already do teach against many of the laws of the nation. A few examples I have in mind are the pro-life stance, when abortion is in fact legal, or the prohibition against divorce (if at all possible to avoid) when divorce too is legal. I'm sure there are many other teachings that either now or in the churches history that do in fact go against the current laws of the land.
Also I understand the sacredness of the LDS temple ceremonies and fully respect that, but this still does not negate the fact that marriage is currently a government practice not a religious one. Even though you are sealed in the temple for the government to recognize that marriage you still have to apply, obtain, and file a license with the state. The government has a primary role aside and apart from the religious marriage traditions.
The other point I want to mention is your claim that this won't impact the benefits of same-sex couples. However, as history has taught us through Brown v. the Board of education in 1954 separate is inherently unequal. Even the mere fact that they cannot be called the same thing is history repeating itself in a different forum, instead of race, now it's about sexuality. It's not legal.
As to your concerns about your children being taught such things in school I can understand and appreciate this fear. However, I'm a little skeptical about how such a lesson would occur. In all my years of school I can never once remember being taught about marriage, and can't imagine why that would change.
Again thank your for your willingness to be in dialogue. We can both be grateful to live in a nation where diverse views and such conversations are possible.
Anonymous,
I too am grateful for the country in which we live, and I hope and pray that it will remain a wholesome and God-fearing country.
You have brought up valid points. The best response I can give is that this is what I believe and that is why I'm supporting it. I have a strong testimony of the sacredness of family, the right of children to be raised by a mother and a father, and of the church to which I belong, and it is my choice to stand up for those beliefs in any way that I can. And people can disagree and that is okay with me. Thank you for your respect and comments. Take care.
-Rebecca
Well, I'm just going to jump right into this conversation : )
Granted I joined the Church at 20 and left at 21, one thing that I grew to really learn about the Church, and loved about it, was that it didn't take stances. This was true with big issues such as Mitt Romney running for the Republican ticket.
So, I don't really understand the concern now. I know that other Christian and Jewish faiths have come together over this, but I have seen the LDS church at the forefront. I'm uncomfortable with the letter I read that went out to members in CA and was read during sacrament meetings. I think members of the Church are smart enough to know, and have the right to decided how they want to vote.
To the anonymous person, yes, legalizing gay marriage will affect what is taught in school. Think of this from the eyes of a six or seven year old. The education system has explained who we are (boys or girls), how we are physically different (private parts), and the very basics of how we were made (man + women = baby). I remember being taught this, and it's going to get confusing when gay parents get involved.
Do I believe in gay marriage? No. Will I vote against it? Yes. Do I support prop 8? Yes. But not because I don't think gay people should have rights.
My mom and I were actually talking about this today. We both agree, the GLBTA community needs to quit forcing their beliefs/desires onto religious institutions. I am all for civil unions with the rights of marriage, but as Becca said... don't call it marriage.
Also, it drives me crazy when people compare the civil rights movement with the GLBTA movement. They are totally different. Comparing interracial marriage to gay marriage is not even valid. Race and sexuality are two different things.
Let's also keep in mind the the GLBTA community has a huge voice. There are other minority groups out there who are lacking more than their basic right to marry, such as access to clean water, affordable health care, safe places to live, clothing... We need to take care of one thing at a time, and frankly, gay marriage is not at the top of my list.
The only thing that irks me about it is the Church's very prominent involvement.
Thanks Katie, you said some things that I didn't have the words for. I too am a little surprised at the Church's involvement, but to me, that just goes to show how much more important this issue is.
This is a big deal, and it will impact life in many ways that maybe we can't even predict. What starts (or is prevented) in this situation will change our society.
I guess the conversation continues :~)
Thank you for your thoughts Katie. I guess I still don't see how allowing same-sex marriage will impact education or the lives of other families.
You mention that in school they teach the differences between male and female and basics of how a babies conception. But I don't remember ever having that lesson. Well... I guess in 5th grade we learned about puberty and in 8th grade we watched a child birth but not at age 6 or 7, that was a conversation left for the home. Although in the event such a conversation actually did happen nothing changes. Boys are still boys, girls are still girls, and sperm + egg still makes a baby. I'm not seeing how same-sex marriage complicates this.
I don't know if you've ever lived in California, but at least in the bay area same sex parents are hardly unusual, this law doesn't change what already exists, which are in many cases, functional same-sex parent families. All it does is give them equal standing under the law.
Not to mention same-sex marriage (with the title marriage) has been legal in Mass. for 4 years. The world hasn't stopped, and families continue to live and sustain just fine in the state.
I can see some of your frustration with the comparison between the civil rights movement and this issue. Obviously the race problem in our country is much more severe and still on going. But I believe the comparison gets made because it works. Courts use the landmark cases from the race struggle in their decisions. (The CT supreme courts ruling on this issue is one example). To be discriminated against for any reason is wrong. History has taught of this. And that's what this boils down to discrimination.
I also agree that there are bigger issues and concerns facing minority groups. Which is why I think across the board it should be legalized so we can move on and focus on access to health care, quality education and housing issues etc. Things which I'm already actively working on as well. All are important. Do I think same-sex marriage is the biggest issue facing our country? Of course not, but that doesn't mean it's not important.
I also find it ironic that you mention that the LGBTQ community needs to stop imposing themselves on religious institutions, when in fact the opposite is true. Marriage is above all else a government entity. One does not need to attend or even step foot in a church to be married. They need to go the court house, apply for a license, find a judge and sign the papers. This is true for all people regardless of religious tradition or non-tradition as is the case for some.
The LGBTQA community is not asking the LDS church to allow their marriages to be allowed in the church, they're merely asking for the right to marriage and the benefits that go along with it. If after this some churches choose to preform the ceremonies great. If not that's fine too. That's not what this legislation is about.
Additionally, the only objections that people have against same-sex marriage seem to stem from religion. So again who's imposing what on who?
I guess I don't see the monumental change so many are afraid of. Like I said Mass. has had it for years, many other countries do as well. Life is still happening, religious institutions can still make their own decisions, and I believe we are one step closer to a truly equal society under the law which is a step in the right direction.
Sorry for my novel, and thank you becca for allowing this dialogue on your blog. I know that we are all still going to believe strongly in our own stance, but open, friendly dialogue is so important when living in a diverse society. So I truly do thank you.
Take care.
http://www.foxnews.com/oreilly/index.html
If you click on "Reality Check" Bill does a short story on 1st graders attending a gay marriage as a field trip.
Anon,
Thanks for your thoughts. I might just be a regular old midwestern girl, but gay parents and families are thriving and growing in my little town known as Minneapolis-St. Paul. I have gay family members, dear friends, and have children in the daycare I work at with gay parents. It's part of every American's lives- not just someone in San Fran.
Basic sexual education is indeed being taught in schools. I was born in 86, and to my knowledge the basic concept of man, woman, and man + woman = baby has been taught for a while. This will indeed bring up questions about same sex families because children will question and teachers will be expected to answer. I hardly am comfortable with my children learning about anal sex in school, or all the complications of invitro, adoption, etc... My philosophy is: keep it simple. Young children are very affected by what they are told/taught, and as someone who was overwhelmed by the basics of learning about puberty the concept of gay parents, sexuality, and families would be overwhelming. Not to mention confusing.
Just passing a law to appease a group of people who might have more resources and voice than other minority groups is not a reason to give them what they want and "move on." I refuse to. When there are children walking around without shoes, people eating out of garbage cans, our economy affecting people so more and more families are out on the street, babies born with HIV, etc... gay marriage goes to the furthest back burner. I think it's really unfair that the GLBTA community, which does have a big voice and lots of influence should just receive their way. It's just not ethical in my mind.
Maybe we're seeing things differently, but from my understanding the GLBTA community wants it to be called marriage. I have no issue with them having the rights of marriage, but call them civil unions, not marriages (I've already stated this). If they don't want it to be called marriage, and it's strictly about the rights of marriage, then I see no problem. But from my understanding, it's not.
In the conversation I had with my mom we both discussed how despite the government Churches will never change. The government might honor gay marriages, but most mainstream faiths (Catholic, LDS, etc...) will not. And that's where I think there will come BIG problems. Because it's not going to stop with the government, and it would be very saddening to see a group trying to impose change on religious traditions, which I believe eventually will happen.
Kent I tried to find follow the link to the site you were suggesting but couldn't find it.
Also, Katie I realize that same-sex families are every where not just the bay area. I was only speaking of California since this is what Prop. 8 is in reference to.
I'm still not seeing how legalizing same-sex marriage changes the basic sex education. sperm + egg = baby. This is not changed. Not to mention the traditional nuclear family is no longer the norm. There are many children from single family homes, or being raised by grandparents or other legal guardians. Adoption, IVF, and the use of donor gametes are not reserved for any one group, many heterosexuals for any variety of reasons may use this to have a family.
Including my husband and I. We're infertile and will only be able to have a family through a team of doctors or adoption. Not sure why this is scary and needs to be kept a secret. It's the reality for thousands of families.
Age appropriate lessons are always easy to employ and I can hardly conceive of a situation where
in depth detail of any sexual act would be explained to a group of very young children.
And yes they want it called marriage because they deserve an equal title and status under the law, but I've already said my piece and reasoning for that several times. But I will say again marriage is a government issue first and foremost not a religious one. It's not about "appeasing" a group with a large voice, it's about whether the United States can continue to legalize discrimination. That's the only unethical thing I see at play here.
I'm not sure why anything needs to be put on the back burner. It is possible to care and work for many of the problems affecting our country mutually (which as I mentioned I'm currently doing). Not to mention you speak about the time and energy the LGBTQA community is putting into this, but I would argue those opposed are putting in just as much. Obviously for many on both sides this is an important issue.
As for what churches will do. That will be up to each individual church. Some may never change and that is well within their right I would never push any church to do so. However, I'm hopeful that some of the mainline protestant denominations will open their churches up to be truly encompassing of all people.
But again I know we are not going to agree on this issue, and our concerns are very different. I don't have a problem with my future children knowing about the diversity in this world and will in fact teach them such things in my home. And I pray that my own church will someday see the light and be open and affirming to all.
Also as a side note, the individuals pushing for change in particular religious traditions are usually part of those traditions, and are doing so out of love for their faith. It's not the broader LGBTQA movement as a whole which is focused on legislation.
I'm off to search that link you provided again kent. Maybe I'll have better luck this time.
Take care everyone.
Sorry I'm back again. I'll be quick. Kent I figured out the link and I can appreciate that given your religious tradition you would not want your child to attend, I really do understand and respect that. But I've also never gone on a field trip without parental permission.
I'm just guessing here because I don't have any facts as to what happened, but I would guess that the children at the wedding were there with parental permission. No problem that I can see. Anyone could opt out. But again our concerns are different.
What is your fear with some of the children attending the wedding? (Aside from that it was called a field trip which I find a little odd only because, there are better, more educational field trips available). Not the best use of time, but again I don't know the details.
I hope this link works easier.
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1815820715/bctid1822459319
Anon,
Do public schools take children to orthodox weddings? I don't think so. I am appalled that they were taken to a gay marriage. Talk about indoctrinating young minds! Yikes!
I know I'm not Kent, but I would be upset with my children attending the wedding because a) weddings shouldn't be open to field trips, lol b) it's indoctrinating my children with views I don't condone c) It is giving the right to the educations system to indoctrinate my children with political beliefs
Did you miss the part where I said that if I were to guess they were there with parental permission. Again I'm guessing because I don't know the facts, but all field trips I ever took as a child I had to get parental permission I'm assuming that was the case here.
Second, I agreed that it was a waste of a field trip. Other than that no harm no foul in my opinion. Easy to opt out.
Third I don't know if they take them to orthodox weddings. I'm sure if they did it wouldn't make the news so there's no way to know.
I do realize the parents can opt out for their children, but its the idea that my child will not go on the bus with everyone else and has to stay at home , or at school because the school decided that this is something that needs to be taught. And the reason I brought it up, is because I believe that this is just the begining. Change never occurs overnight, and I feel that if we dont take a stand on this, over the years it will get worse and worse.
Thanks for your reply Kent. Here's a link to a longer article with more information about the field trip if you're interested.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-samesex-teachable-oct11,0,4278379.story
It was the idea of a parent (not the school) as a surprise for the students teacher. Two families chose to opt out (so that option always stands for any field trip).
Although I still don't necessarily think that it was a good use of the school day, but the kids were there with parental support, so again who is anyone to question the judgement of the 18 parents who had no issue with the excursion.
Also if we're really going to use this one example of the things to come, I think it's very telling that only 2 of the 20 opted out. That's a 90% approval rating.
This is just one example. Sometimes parents are not able to "opt out". I dont know if you went to the link becca posted...but its a story of a man asking a school in some state back east if he could be notified when the school was teaching about same sex marriage so he could opt his children out, and the school replied that they wouldnt. when he said that it was against his religion and he didnt want his children learning about that the basically said, too bad. To make a long story short he wouldnt leave until they made SOME kind of accomidation, instead they called the police and he was handcuffed and sent to jail.
Whats to stop this from happening again, but with my children?
http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid1815820715/bctid1822459319
Here is that link again in case you didnt see it.
I as a future father cannot allow this to happen to my children, thats why I am taking such a firm stand on it.
Hi kent,
I've been trying to make the link work, but so far nothing. Maybe it's my computer. Is there another way for me to access it?
Thanks.
I googled the info. you provided about the case and was able to find a link that worked. It's an interesting case, although I'm sure it will not be a surprise to you that after reading the court documents and the information provided by both the plaintiffs and the defendants I side with the school, and the court who wrote:
"The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday agreed with a judge's decision last year that a school can expose children to contrary ideas without violating their parents' rights to exercise religious beliefs.
"Public schools," wrote Judge Sandra L. Lynch, "are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them."
This is not a question regarding curriculum but instead conversation that happen spontaneously and books that are written on the subject, and I don't believe in censorship. Age appropriate material yes, but not censorship and this book appeared to be age appropriate.
The book in question was sent home in a bag of things relating to diversity. All the parents had to do was throw it away. No problem, or even use it as a teaching moment for the children. What a great opportunity to explain the reality of the world and then perhaps a word on your own religious tradition and teaching.
Additionally they do have the option to "opt" out of any planned curriculum discussions on sex education as is always the case. But to ask for notification on spontaneous conversation and questions is not possible, which if you read the court documents is what these parents were asking for.
Not to mention this doesn't change the fact that same-sex couples with children exist everywhere. These spontaneous conversations will happen as a result regardless of whether same-sex marriage is legalized or not. Reading a book about how some children have two dads or two moms which is age appropriate is hardly indoctrination. It's merely a glimpse into the reality of our world. With or without legalized same-sex marriage.
Teaching love and awareness for diversity is a great thing in my opinion. When it comes down to it, we all bound by our common humanity. We all feel, we all love, we all hurt etc. That's the lesson I hope to teach my future children.
Thanks for the link, really interesting case. And I can see and truly understand how it would be troubling for you given your religious tradition.
Wow, I have written so much sorry about that. Thanks again for the continued conversation and links. I take all new information as a learning opportunity.
Just because the courts ruled that a school can teach things that are against religious beliefs doesnt make it the right thing to do.
There are several things about the situation that rubs me the wrong way. I can go on and on of cases that have occured where because of religious beliefs public schools have changed the way they do things in order to not offend the minority. Such as saying the pledge of allegiance, prayer, or mentioning God in lessons. I understand that no one can stop spontaneous conversations, but when it comes to formalized lessons some things should be left out. Prayer, and the pledge of allegiance was pushed out of classrooms, but was still allowed where students formed groups to talk about it or perform it. Why isnt the same thing occuring for gay marriage? Its against my religion.
Bottom line is that gay marriage is civially correct, but is it morally? I would say 99% of all religions preach against it. So, whould we be a God fearing country? Or ignore what he says? Like it says in the scriptures, "As for me and my house, I will serve the lord."
What's moral and what's not is a tricky business because it varies from person to person and from religion to religion. For me Same-sex marriage and relationships are not immoral. Legalized discrimination is.
The congregation I belong too also does not teach that it's immoral, in fact one sunday we had reconciliation service where the diversity of family was talked about and preached on, and I know that the UCC and Episcopal churches both ordain gay and lesbian individuals, so I would think the next move would be marriage, if made legalized in the state.
I also know of a Reform Jewish temple who preformed a same-sex marriage. So based on my own very slim experience I don't know that 99% of religions teach against it, but I don't have the sources to back me up it's a guess. I would be interested in any sources you could provide on this. Theologically I can reconcile the two, same-sex marriage does go against my religious beliefs.
Was the pledge pushed out of the classroom? I'm really asking because I don't know. I graduated from High school in 2003 and I know we were still saying it, but a lot has changed in 5 years. I don't know what I think about this, as I haven't spent much time studying the issue to have a concrete opinion.
I'm also okay with no prayer in the classroom. Not everyone is Christian and not everyone believes in God. So many of the religious traditions are so beautiful each unique and each one should be equally respected. If this means not singling out one then that's the best way to do it, we live in a diverse country and attempting to live communally goes along with the diversity.
The other great thing about prayer is that it is personal. At any moment during the day no matter where I am I can pray. That's an option for all Christians, again a wonderful lesson to teach your children, prayers don't have to be spoken, and no matter where they are God can hear.
Also because marriage is a government issue it's not possible to compare the issue to things like prayer in school which are religious in nature.
There has been a lot said about this, and the debate will continue to go on and on, so I think it is time that we agree to disagree on this one. I don't want to seem like we are just "giving up" on this--I just feel like we have all taken a stand on how we feel and expressed our beliefs and I don't want this blog to become an endless debate or argument.
Thank you everyone for your input, for keeping your comments respectful and intelligent, and for taking advantage of the rights that we have to speak our minds. It's a good thing to have varied opinions, and it is also good to hear other's opinions in an effort to increase our understanding of one another. We are all blessed to have our country and the freedom to speak and be heard.
I truly feel my awareness and understanding of both my beliefs and the beliefs of others has been increased through this discussion, and for that I am grateful.
Thanks again.
-Rebecca
Post a Comment