stillidealistic's picture

    Anyone Else Overdosing?

    If you're like me, you may have overdosed on the subject of gay marriage the last few days. I am only affected in that I am saddened when any group of people does not have the same rights as everyone else. In the context of the SCOTUS decision, I don't see it as a religious issue. Each individual religion will decide that for themselves. Even within the Christian community there is division. Some churches have accepted it, some haven't, and some are still wrestling with the issue.

    The point for me is, we do not live in a theocracy. If ISIS has taught us anything, it SHOULD be that we SHOULDN'T want to. When an extreme faction of a religion takes over, crazy things can happen.

    There are many religions in this country. And there are people who practice no religion at all. Some of those people are spiritual, but not religious. It is a broad spectrum. IMHO the preferred goal in our country would be to make sure that all people, regardless of their religious beliefs (or lack thereof) have the same rights and privileges. In a perfect country no one group would be able to carve out "rights" that no one else gets.

    Enter marriage. Some Christians want to claim it as their own. But, like it or not, at some point, governments began issuing marriage licenses, and at that point, it became a "contract" that has with it benefits and obligations. I was never asked when I got my license if I was a believer, because it was irrelevant. It was not a religious issue. I was married in church, so I added a covenant with God that was not required. My choice. Interestingly enough, I was basically agnostic at the time, so I don't even know why I did it that way.

    I hear the term "redefining marriage" and in truth, it has been, but I don't necessarily see that as bad thing, at least as far as the government is concerned. Equality for all citizens required it.

    I don't believe that anything in the SCOTUS decision changes the religious connotation. Churches that believe marriage is between a man and a woman will not be required to marry people of the same sex. If that pressure starts being exerted, the you-know-what SHOULD hit the fan. Separation of church and state and all...

    I can see a scenario where some people may want to push that, and lawsuits may follow. I truly hope that will not be the case, because, again, IMHO, people should be able to choose who can be a member of their church and who can't. And people who do not believe in what that church believes in should not be pushing to be a part of it.

    My point in posting this is not to convert anyone to my way of thinking, but to throw out there another POV for your consideration. 

    It is a subject that will be prayed and thought about a lot, and my hope is that we can, as a country, get *past it and on to the pressing business of making sure that the American Dream is working for all citizens.

    *edited to reflect Oxy's catch on my poor use of "passed"!


    Stilli, I'm somewhat overdosed. Why, I'm not sure. But I have a certain unease about it---like the other shoe hasn't dropped yet and when the religious freedom lawsuits from county clerks come through the system we'll be back at square one.

    Are you yourself unresolved about this decision? Just curious.

    BTW, was "passed" for "past" a Freudian slip? Maybe we should pass on all of this. Or maybe I should.


    Things will likely play like they did after Loving v Virginia. Some states and some clerks will balk at the ruling, but the legal process will deal with their dissent.

    Thanks for the catch!

    I THINK it's a done deal. I can't imagine SCOTUS would hear another case, but who knows. In my own mind, it was the right decision. I don't see it as a religious issue, but a decision about equality.

    I don't see how "religious freedom" has suffered from it. Churches are free to continue along, just as they have. No one can force a church to marry gays at this point. Now, should people start pushing for that, I can see a real problem, but I hope everyone will just let sleeping dogs lie. I really do believe in the separation of church and state, and think the government should stay out of that kettle of fish! (I've got the old sayings going on here!)

    Two side stories stood out one for stupidity, the other for bravery.

    One was CNN misidentifying a flag displaying sex toys as an ISIS flag. They called in a terrorism expert

    A 7-seven year old girl challenges a homophobic venom spewing preacher

    The new worry is the burning down of African American churches.

    There are churches that gay couples can find to marry them, if they want a church wedding. 

    Good blog.

    It is fun to have you back.

    I am watching Rachel and there are all these county clerks down south refusing licenses to gay couples. It is funny to me.

    The real issue involves SS and pensions and other legalities.

    Anyway, we both made the front page!

    Kind of nice, huh?

    Real nice, Arthur. I really have missed blogging here. It's good to be back.

    By the way, you beat me tonite. hahahahah

    In numbers, you beat me fair and square.

    I  just had to add this.


    Let's not make it a competition! Heeheehee! You'll blow me out of the water big time. Anyway, it feels good to be getting back in the groove.

    Here's an interesting article about the number of christian denominations that have accepted same sex marriage.

    Generally lost in the discussion is the fact that an ever-increasing number of Christian churches have decided on their own to perform or at least accept same-sex marriages. The trend will probably get more attention after yesterday’s decision by the Episcopal Church of the U.S.—the denomination to which eleven presidents belonged, and traditionally viewed as the the spiritual home of the country’s economic and cultural elite—to authorize national use of a same-sex marriage rite.

    I found this article interesting. It makes it clear to me that not everyone gets the point that the SCOTUS decision is being perceived as something it is not, at least in my mind. I don't see it necessarily as an acceptance of anything other than the fact that the government has a responsibility to make sure that ALL of its citizens enjoy the same rights.

    Latest Comments