Prop Pressure

With the upcoming election on November 4th there has been lot of activity. First off we have the Presidential elections, which are getting more divisive each day. Then, we have the members of Congress and State representatives trying to get reelected. Last we have the issue of the propositions brought forth to the vote by public interest groups. For a political science major, I stay pretty quiet on most issues but lately this whole proposition thing has gotten me a little wound up.

To be frank, until last night I didn't know anything about the propositions on the ballot except the energy bill (#7) and the gay marriage bill (#8). Probably because they are what gets the most buzz in the media and have the most personal relevance to me. Prop 8 in particular is a contentious subject for me because I have to weigh both sides and neither seems to leave a lot of wiggle or tries to suggest a different more long term approach.

When I first started talking to friends in the Church about Prop 8 I felt sick to my stomach. I was newly investigating the Church, trying to find what my true belief system was and see how it would blend into my choice of religion. I spoke with my family and they told me to stay true to myself, so I have.

At first, to be Yes on Prop 8 went against everything I knew from my beliefs and personal experience. Now, I understand the secular ramifications of Prop 8 on the Church such as lawsuits or stopping adoption services. I understand the idea of being territorial about the places that hold the most religious significance. For example, I can't go to the temple because I have to wait a year. I don't think it's fair for other people to go there if they are not of the same faith and belief system. If a couple wanted to get married there and got denied they could sue.

We are in this situation because despite what our country admits we do have a blending of Church and State that goes back for a long time. Blending something sacred like marraige with federal law is what created this problem in the first place.

My solution would be to start separating the system. It will be a long and probably painful bureacratic process. Of course this ides will have to progress to the Supreme Court to be made legal and binding as a federal issue, but my suggestion is to take all of the marraiges after a certain date and create two seperate processes.

Those married before the date would be issued a defacto domestic agreement to mail in and be put on file (or something to that effect) outlining their state and federal rights as a couple. For the religious element, marraige will remain religious. They can have a religious ceremony but it will be a separate deal, which means that a religious couple would also register for a domestic partnership agreement.

This agreement would allow for same sex and hetero couples to each enjoy the freedoms of acknowledged partnership under the law and give permanancy to their commitment. It would keep churches, temples, and synagogues safe from prosecution, loss of tax exempt status and not restrict their freedom to practice their beliefs. And for those who do not belong to a religious contingent or do not wish to get married, they would still be protected under law.

Correct me if I'm wrong but as I see it the only way marraige can be permitted by religious groups is if religion conforms on it's own.

For those nervous about education in school, why wouldn't you want your kids to know how to practice safe sex in all it's forms and uses? Ignorance breeds ignorance. Literally. For those nervous about relationship counceling in schools, wouldn't you rather have your child be healthy and happy than introverted and depressed for fear that they are alone in their sexual orientation? A person is born gay. It's not a choice. If the answer is no to the above, why teach kids about relationships in school at all? Take that back from schools and give it to parents to teach their own progeny. After all, the kids can learn what the parents really want them to and it would be private. It's the responsibility of parents to prepare their children for this anyway, right?

As for the adoption agencies run by religious organizations, I agree that if Prop 8 fails it could effect how religion based adoption agencies run their organizations. Thousands of families might be negatively effected should the Church decide to stop operations because of gay adoptions. Both hetero and homosexual couples could use outside agencies but it would be sad for any families that wants to adopt within the Church. In reality, how many gay couples are really going to the religion based adoption agencies? I would like that statistic.

Overall, I respect both groups rights. Neither side is correct in how they are dealing with this issue because the tactics are divisive. I see how it can effect both and why this issue matters to people but I am having a trying time reconciling both sides. I am surprised that there is no gray area on this issue and people aren't thinking outside the box and examining the cause of this discord between state and religion to provide a better solution for all. It makes sense to deal with this as a long term issue that will effect our government, legal system, education system, religions and lifestyle. I would encourage you to think of solutions and email them to your CA state representatives. Encourage gray thinking. No more of this black or white junk. Everyone deserves to practice their beliefs and live a free, happy life. I respect people who can voice their own opinions on the issue and welcome any and all feedback.