In which I am polite, adult, and still manage to strike below the belt at least three times.

[azurelunatic]

An old friend of mine IMed to ask how I was doing. Said friend is LDS. Prop 8 came up. Said friend was not worried on the grounds that those wanting to get married can go to another state to do so, and it will eventually be overturned in the Federal courts. Said friend can legitimately bring up old overturned marriage laws regarding race, because he is a child of a mixed marriage. However, I got brassed off enough to say the following to him:

I think that marriage is more than a "want" when access to medical services and other partner benefits are at stake.

I think that access to marriage that requires going out of state to get married is no meaningful access.

You are not a California voter, so I do not hold you accountable for any part of the California vote. You are an adult male in your church. I am not your wife so I have no rightful say over what you have to say to your church, but in a country that separates church and state I think your church has no right interfering with affairs of state to attempt to disenfranchise any citizen, and were I your wife that is what I would tell you to tell them.


I count three exceptionally low blows in this commentary. How many can you count? (Note: this is Figment I was talking to.)

Comments

[gameboyguy13.livejournal.com]

In addition, even if you do go to another state to get married, unless you live in New York your state will most likely not recognize your marriage, so it's largely a symbolic gesture only.

I don't understand how said friend can be in favor of prop 8 yet be fine with advising people to go out of state for gay marriages and/or waiting on it to be overturned. Seems contradictory to me.

[azurelunatic]

I don't know if he was in favor of it so much as he was not distressed that it had passed. Because, you see, distressed that it had passed would mean that his church had done something *wrong*.

[pne.livejournal.com]

in a country that separates church and state I think your church has no right interfering with affairs of state

This.

(Also LDS, incidentally. And puzzled at how much the church seems to have pushed for Prop 8.)

[azurelunatic]

I don't mind religious organizations getting on the case of government in support of compassion.

Your church as a whole, from the limited bits I have observed of it, seems to be of the opinion that everyone would benefit from many of its teachings, that everyone should pair off in male/female couples and have children, and that while all sin and fall short of the glory of G-d, it is a lot easier to not sin if the temptation to sin is removed, so it is in the best interests of the faith (and all potential converts) if the surrounding society is as free as possible from the opportunities to sin. Thus hoping that the government would stop not just condoning same-sex relationships, but actively giving their blessing in the form of allowing marriage.

[pne.livejournal.com]

But then why not also propose bringing back Prohibition? Or advocate stiff fines for cohabitation or pre-marital sex? Or forbid pornography?

[azurelunatic]

Those barn doors are swinging open very wide. I do not think that there is a chance of success on anything but making tighter laws on pornography.

Same-sex marriage still has a broad enough opposition that attempting to suppress it is easier.

[tcpip.livejournal.com]

This is going to be awesome..

http://community.livejournal.com/politicsforum/1940729.html

[azurelunatic]

It's certainly going to be interesting.

And to think that some of the people on either side of this who have just been alienated from each other are natural allies in the plural marriage thing, heh.

[tygerr.livejournal.com]

*snerk*

I doubt many of the lefty-polyamory crowd are terribly approving of LDS-style patriarchal polygyny. Likewise/conversely, I also doubt many Mormons look kindly on the freewheeling variety of relationship structures amongst the larger community of polyfolk.

But it certainly added a giggle to my day, thinking of the two groups as "natural allies". :-D

[azurelunatic]

Patriarchal polygyny and freewheeling polyfolk alike would each be more than happy to have laws that allow for the legal marriage of multiple consenting adults, though.

Freewheeling polyfolk would probably be glad to have the bankroll of the church backing the movement, and the church would probably be secretly happy to have the freewheeling polyfolk lending legitimacy to the campaign.