Friday, February 21, 2014

Politics and religion shouldn't be married I don't care if gays get married

Ok let me begin by saying I don't care what is or isn't a sin; it isn't my place to monitor sins. My whole issue with the debate on homosexual marriage is not one from a traditional religious stance. It is one from a political stance. See there seems to be this huge religious debate on whether or not gays can marry because God doesn't recognize gay marriage, but my question is does He recognize marriages of pagans, atheists, agnostics, blasphemers,  non-Christians, or other groups that do not subscribe to religious doctrine? We do not prevent these people from getting married. There are ordained ministers in each of these groups that can marry people. Why then do we prevent homosexuals from marrying? The religious debate is irrelevant here.

Also, from a political stance, if it is illegal to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, how then do we justify this? Are we not discriminating on the basis of sexual orientation in the area of marriage licenses? This is a political question, not a religious one either. I would think that this is unconstitutional.

Let's just toy with the idea that we think it is okay to say that gayness is a special sin that garners special treatment. Why then does other sin not garner the same treatment? I am divorced, and the Bible is clearly against this behavior. Why was I allowed to remarry? Of course, I do have a bit of an excuse. The circumstances of my divorce did involve what could have been considered sexual immorality. Of course, this is a matter of interpretation, as are the scriptures that handle homosexuality in the Bible. Let me also say I am not specifically blaming either party for immortality, only stating that someone behaved in a manner that may or may not be interpreted as immoral during the 13 years we were married. We both had faults please don't go telling him I said he was sexually immoral. I didn't.

I would also like to play devil's advocate for a moment. Which Bible are we considering the scripture to come from? There are many interpretations of the Bible. The most widely cited seems to be the King James Version (KJV). This version was translated in the seventeenth century, many years after the original Bible was written. I would like to offer food for thought here. The Bible was written by fallible man's hand, and in turn, translated by fallible man's hand. While the Bible may have been instructed by God, do we really know that man did not make mistakes? Also, In 1611 the Bible was commissioned to be translated by a King. In these days one did not anger a King for fear of his or her own life. How do we know that there were not alterations made to the Bible in order to appease the King? We don't. This is where faith comes in. As a Quaker, I believe we have our own relationships with God. I believe that God teaches love of all people regardless of sin. I love my brothers and sisters regardless of sin. I am not perfect, and find that I love some more than others, yes. I have to distance myself from some because of my own mental health, but I am no better than any of my brothers and sisters through Christ.

I cannot wrap my head around a God that would preach so much love and then instruct me to ostracize a group the way that Americans seem to be ostracizing our homosexual brothers and sisters. God tells me to love them and that He will deal with their sins. I am to teach them to live for Christ and to be an example of Jesus' love for us. I am not supposed to make them hate themselves or make them feel inferior. I love all people and I believe that if our constitution says that one right is good for all the ALL should mean ALL.

I don't believe guns should even exist, but the second amendment gives the rights to ALL law abiding citizens to own guns; therefore, I do not challenge that law and believe that congress needs to leave it alone. Those of you that carry guns know what I am talking about. Chew on that.

Monday, February 3, 2014

Be Pacific.... HEHEHE English Grammar Nazi on the loose.

Recently my buddy Carl Jones posted some of his pet peeves. One of my biggest pet peeves is specificity. I can't stand for someone to say they don't believe in something that clearly exists. Here is an example: I don't believe in abortions. Well, I think what you are trying to say is that you don't believe that having an abortion is the right choice. They exist. Not believing in something does not take it out of being. I, personally, do not believe that an abortion is the right thing to do. I also do not believe in condemning others for doing things differently than I. I know that this occurs, so I don't believe in practicing this myself, and I try not to.

I said in my last post that I don't believe that divorce should be the first answer to marriage problems. I used to say I didn't believe in divorce. I never condemned people who got divorces, because I don't know what prompted them to do so. I know we all make choices when we are faced with situations that we may or may not think we would make. Hypothetical questions are funny. I can sit here and claim that I would not react a certain way in a million years in a certain situation, but the truth of the matter is, until I am faced with that situation, I don't know what my reaction will truly be.

It's like when Christians say they don't believe in Satan. Yes, you do. You don't worship Satan, but you cannot believe in one without believing in the other. Not worshiping Satan and not believing in Satan are not the same thing. Say what you mean. 

Or how some people say I don't believe in Racism, or Gay people, or any number of things. I don't believe racism is fair or right, but my classmates at A&T can tell you racism very much exists. Not believing in it doesn't make it non-existent. Gay people exist. Maybe you disagree with the lifestyle, but not believing in someone is just silly.

Another form of specificity I have an issue with is something I hear all the time now. It's the phrase "any kind of way." I usually hear it in the form "oh he/ she can't talk to me/ you any kind of way." WTF does that mean? If I am talking to you I am talking to you in some sort of way. Do you mean in any kind of negative way? Then say that. I don't know that just makes me nuts. Tell me what kind of way I can't talk to you. Any kind of way is non specific.

Say what you mean. Even if it is mean. I would rather you be mean and honest than be absurd. At least you will be abundantly clear.