heretic888
Senior Master
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2002
- Messages
- 2,723
- Reaction score
- 60
Kane said:I knew this thread was going to turn back onto the topic of religion. You know there are people in the world who are against same-sex marriage for reasons other than religion.
Perhaps consciously they believe they are, but intentions and worldviews have a context and backdrop that far exceeds the limitations of any one human being's deliberate awareness. Even the language you were raised to speak has a substantial influence on the way you think about and see the world, whether you are consciously aware of this phenomenon or not.
And, make no mistake, these anti-gay prejudices have their origins in the religious context and traditional values of the culture we find ourselves in. Its a common trend in most patriarchal societies, actually (I would consider the democratic West to be a recovering patriarchy). This is especially prevalent in the United States, above many other Western democracies, in that much of the language and values of our nation rests on early Puritan settlers.
Kane said:Marriage is between a man and a woman, and the whole idea of two different genders coming together is the whole idea of marriage! I don't know why some people can't figure this out!
Perhaps because, unlike you, not all of us subscribe to the illusion that words and ideas have a predetermined meaning independent of the perception of human beings or the changes of time and history. The world is not pregiven, it is in many ways a construction based on a correspondence with objective reality.
Likewise with sociocultural institutions like marriage. Their definitions and understandings evolve and adapt with the times. Once upon a time, "citizen" only meant able-bodied, land-owning white man, y'know...
Kane said:At the same time everything can't be the conservatives way which is why this needs to be decided on a centrist fashion! Make a new union, give the same rights as straight couples but call it something different and don't equate the two. Both unions will be considered equal but different. That way everyone will be happy, or at least one group will be as happy as the other and vice versa.
On this I would agree.
My position is essentially that of Howard Dean's in that I support same-sex civil union, but don't believe we should be telling the churches of this country who they can and cannot marry. At the same time, I believe any church that is welling to conduct a same-sex ceremony should be more than legally able of doing so.
Laterz.