this was a letter i wrote to a friend, about the amendment 2 discussion we were having. i've been wanting to blog about this for awhile, and i felt like this was a pretty good representation of how i feel right now. for those of you who don't know, amendment 2 is on the florida ballot this year and it would add an official definition of marriage to the state constitution, defining it as being between a man and a woman.
text of message:
first of all, here's something i need to establish. that i understand that whatever the prophets and GAs say is generally a trump card, and that that is the way it is in Provo and with most LDS people that i am every going to talk to about this issue, and that's okay. i understand that and totally respect that, and i think it's a valid reason to be voting however you are voting.
but for me, it doesn't fly. especially on the issue of gay rights, because i've found that everything that i personally believe in basically goes head to head with official church statements of late.
of late being these last couple of months, because before that with all the literature the church has recently put out (god loves his children, the oak's interview from awhile ago, a couple of ensign articles) it seemed like the church was taking a fairly progressive stance and i liked what they were working with there.
however, i feel like the church's enormous support for prop 8 and anti-lgbt legislation is a step backwards.
i also feel like provo is a sinkhole of anti-gay rhetoric, and i've sort of given up trying to defend my beliefs, which is sad, because the majority is adamantly, fanatically against my beliefs. well, that's probably not true. i feel like when i do bring up issues, people are a lot more caring and loving and understanding than i expect.
but i think this has been hightened by the prop 8 rallies. yes, i know all about the official support, and the special broadcast, and how california members are supposed to be donating all this time and energy to support the effort, and that's all really interesting because they church doesn't often take official positions like this, though it has an amazing amount of manpower and is an extremely effective network for this kind of situation (which makes me feel kind of sad that we utilize this for anti-gay culture war issues but we would never do that for any sort of anti-war movement. but anyway, that's different, i guess.)
so basically, what i'm trying to say is that i feel like there is no room whatsoever for dissent or questioning of any kind in this town concerning prop 8, and i think that's too bad. that's what life is for: to question and dissent from what's "right"and try and find out the truth of all things. that is the plan of salvation. that is what we fought for--to come to earth and be individuals who make mistakes and question things, and sometimes question things and get it right, and sometimes question things and get it wrong, but still have the ability to come to the truth anyway.
this relates to this issue, i swear. because yes, i have a testimony and i'm not an apostate, but i still want to be able to struggle with this issue in the normal realm, and not just be all "well the prophet said so, so i don't want to hear anything against it." i can't do that. i can't live like that, especially not with this issue.
okay.
now, to concretes. because we can deal in ideas and trends all day, but that won't get us anywhere because if there are not concrete examples, then your ideals are no more valid than mine. got that?
here's the thing: same-sex marriage is already illegal in florida. it's in our state laws several different times. we already have a defense of marriage act. so if you are voting for it because you don't want gay people to get married, don't worry. they already can't. this isn't a debate about whether gay marriage has to be recognized or not, or that churches will have to recognize gay marriage or else they will be shut down. that's not what voting this law down would do. if it doesn't pass, nothing changes. the LGBT community doesn't suddenly have the right to get married. that would take a lot lot lot more legislation. the only thing that would happen is that it wouldn't pass.
so what does it mean if it does pass? that's debatable. there are several theories. i think they are all valid and possible, but i encourage you to research them yourself. first, it's to galvanize the religious right and get them out to the polls. if there are more right-wing voters voting in florida, which is traditionally a swing state, then it will go mccain, and that is a lot votes to be throwing at mccain. florida has a ton of electoral votes. so that would make it totally worth it for a lot of the Right to do this amendment just for that.
second of all, there are lots of senior citizens living in florida. a lot of senior citizens do not get married, because they would lose some social security benefits, but they still want to have visiting rights, ect. i don't ethically believe this is right, it's cheating the system and while the system sucks and deserves to be cheated, it still is dishonest. anyway, it would definitely be within the corporate government's interest to somehow get these senior citizens to stop having their cake and eating it too, and this law could very well do that.
now, the pro-amendment people will tell you that this isn't true, that's stretching the wording of the admendment and that's not what will happen. here's the wording of the amendment:
Inasmuch as a marriage is the legal union of only one man and one woman as husband and wife, no other legal union that is treated as marriage or the substantial equivalent thereof shall be valid or recognized.
i think it could definitely go that way. supporters of the amendment argue that by not having this law in florida or in california, you are somehow endangering freedom of religion. that because a law like this is passed, churches or schools or other institutions that do not allow gay marriage could be shut down. i think this is also stretching it--if it's possible for that to happen if the law doesn't pass, it's possible for senior citizens and other unmarried couples, those that are in a legal union but not husband and wife, to also not be recognized as having the same rights as other married couples.
however, i don't think that will happen. if it passes, the courts won't let it outlaw partnership laws for senior citizens. i also don't think the courts would shut down churches because of their beliefs. i would hope that wise justices would recognize that this is a country where people are able to believe how they choose, and if that means that we don't allow gay students to attend byu, then that is what we chose. i agreed to that when i came here. (ps---this line of thought does need more development. but really, i see the argument that the defeat of these amendments as an attack on our freedom of belief as completely absurd. do you actually think that would happen? maybe. but only because of fanaticism, which these kind of laws don't solve, they only inflame.)
all that said, you are right. if the prophet is inspired to tell us something about how we should vote, well, God does know all things and He loves all his children way more than i ever could, and i have to have faith in that. but he didn't say that for florida. there's a proposition in arizona like this one, too, and they haven't said anything about that. he was inspired and directed to issue this fatwa for california, but not for the other places. if the prophet doesn't say, it means vote on your own judgement. and this is my judgement.
and freedom, and specifically, the freedom to believe however we choose
and see fit, is the most important freedom we have. but i think that in this day in age, it's also really important to make sure religion and belief and whatever that means to you is still examined. and that's what i'm trying to do. and also, it is most important that belief doesn't become fanatical. i've spent way too much time in southern baptist flordia and in the middle east to ever ever try and impose my beliefs on other people in anyway, and i think that needs to be kept in mind whenever our beliefs clash with other peoples in a public forum like politics and voting. bigotry and thinking we have a divine mandate to scourge society of all that we see as unfit never works out well. in the book of mormon, it was the self-righteous as well as the un-religious that caused the destruction of society.
so, don't take my word for anything more than what it is, my opinion. think about it yourself. pray about it. whatever you do to make a decision. one thing i suggest, don't think all in ideals. don't think all in trends. i'm a mystic, sure, i love ideas and living in a metaphysical world, but i want to live in the real one, too. you can do both. have a dual nature. i think we're old enough to start taking some of the responsibility of bringing ideas into the real world. and one of those ideas that we should bring into the real world is that we can all of God's children can live together in harmony, and be able to use their agency, whether that means believing that homosexuality is wrong or believing that people should be able to love each other however they choose.
so there you have it. i don't support the amendment. i'm not voting for it. first of all, i think it's stupid and second of all i support equal rights. but i also consider myself to be religious. and those two things seem to not mesh right away. but they will. i am refining my opinions all the time. i do not come to conclusions quickly. but i come to them, and hopefully when i do, they are the right ones.
**end message.
i hope i don't sound like an arrogant prick here. i think maybe i do: i am so smart and i think about things and no one else does! that's not how i mean to sound. it's probably what i think in my subconscious, but i would never let everyone else know like this :).
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Friday, October 3, 2008
Invisible
I was talking to Nacia a week or two ago about the biases that we have and don't even notice. its a weird topic to approach; if donald rumsfield was actually a thinkin' man, i would say that undetected biases are what he meant by those "unknown unknowns." because the thing is about real bias, to you, it isn't bias--to yourself, you just think you're right.
one hint i've used to detect this unknown unknown is i probably have some sort of bias when i just can't manage to be on the same communication planet as someone else--where you have No Idea where they are coming from, and there is basically no point where you can reference. If you realize the difference, it's not something that you can breach because....well, you just can't. you can't let yourself sink to that level. that's the bias. you know (think) you're right.
let me put this in concretes.
there were a number of things that absolutely disturbed me about the presidential foreign policy debate and the VP debate, but the number one issue was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how it is talked about and portrayed in the debates and by the US mass media.
For example, yesterday the VPs discussed the issue at length, for a whole segment or so. but not ONCE did they even SAY the word Palestine or Palestinians. not even the word. no comments. no references. just unabashed, unfettered declarations of love for Israel. Biden and Palin were in complete agreement about their undying, loving devotion to Israel, and their running mates, based on the last debate and other past statements, are in absolute agreement as well. its unanimous: the next administration no matter who is elected offers no bright light at the end of the tunnel for Palestinians (or the LGBT community, either, but that's a whole 'nother disgusting issue of disappointment). Palin even had the gall to mention that they would work toward building an embassy in Jerusalem. i mean, holy shit! freaking sign Palin up for the likud party! grrr....
the point is, current US foreign policy on israel/palestine is completely not on the same planet i am. i don't understand how it could possibly BE the way it is, and you know, i don't think i want to. cuz i think i'm right. bias.
some examples of things i absolutely do not understand:
1) why does everyone trip over each other to pay homage to israel? why does everyone que up to kiss israel's ass? sure, its our "only ally in the middle east." but saddam hussein was our ally as long as it served our interests, and as soon as it didn't anymore...yeah. being our ally has nothing to do with being the "good guy" (http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/110568.html) or being "right" or noble or anything like that. it's politics. i guess i understand that, as in i know how it works. and i guess that its our ally because its the only other democracy in the region, but if you want to claim israel as a democracy with all its human right abuses, than you should be able to claim turkey as one, too, and we don't really have anything to do with them (though i guess we ignore the plight of the turkey's kurdish population just as much as we do the palestinians, if not more, so look! it is the same). and is it really because israel is the holy blessed country of god's chosen people or something? thats another one of those religious notions that i always thought, before i came to The BYU, that no one really thinks like that anymore, along with other "duh" issues like women's rights and evolution, and sadly, there have been waaaaay too many times where my hopeful notions of what general sanity means have been proven to be just naivete (sure, bias, i suppose). so i wish that wasn't a factor, but the sad truth is it probably is. I'd just have to do a survey of my sunday school class to find out, but i don't want to take a chance on wounding my fragile testimony or organized religion.
2) why does everyone continue to ignore the fact that the israelis participate in illegal actions? I feel like anytime there is ever, Ever, just one remark that shows the Palestinians as victims, or mentions that hey, guess what, it sucks for 1.5 million people to live in a tiny strip of land with no access to economic resources or control of their own power or food sources and little to no infrastructure and be denied the right to leave, or that hundreds of illegal jewish settlers in the west bank violently attack palestinian villages and people, if anything like that is ever said, then it's all, "the israelis have got to protect themselves!" and man, have they gotten good at 'protecting' themselves. obviously, being such good allies of the US, they took a page out of our Iraqi/WoT handbook and decided that the best defense is a killer offense. These are some of my favorite (read:disgusting) statistics: http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp
check out the rest of the website, B'Tselem, an Israeli Human Rights group. it's powerful. and its undeniable--the israelis are guilty guilty guilty, just as guilty of terrible crimes and offenses, if not more so at this point, than the Palestinians are. How could you ever say that it's "clear" who the bad guys are? okay. that sounds resonable. not.
3) what the heck the media is doing. that i cannot understand, in this situation, or in a million other situations around the world. i pull up CNN today, and all the "breaking news" links are about skinny dippers in japan and the view hosts and way way WAY too many useless gossip articles about the presidential candidates, and not anything new or useful or factual. i had to go through about 17 other articles in the newswire feed to find 3 paragraphs talking about violent deaths between feuding factions in Northwest India were over 40 people have died. but oh, my bad, you are right. that is not important, and neither are deaths in Palestine and in Iraq, and no one cares about Afghanistan anymore except Obama (sellout. don't even get me started). so yes, please tell us something vague and completely uninformative about the destruction of our economy and the democratic system.
so So many other things to say!
But this is ridiculous. because here's the thing: i know i'm not biased, i'm just searching for truth and answers. i don't want to wipe jews off the face of the planet or destroy israel or extract people, anyone!, from their homeland. Israel is a political, socio-economic, viable entity, and however it came about, it is there, and that's that. you have a right to exist. i saw some pro-Palestinian graffiti in Bethlehem once, and it read "to exist is to resist," and i like it a lot, especially because it was so true, and so ironic, because little did the artist know that it applies to both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. they both exist there. they are both going to have to find a way to exist there. to exist is to resist, and that goes for all things in existence, Israeli or Palestinian or Kurd or Tibetan or whatever. no one wants to destroy israel just because they don't think they have the right to be there--that's not what all those "extremists" that call for israel's destruction are saying. they are saying stop the madness. stop the oppression. stop the blockades and the discrimination and the illegal settlements and illegal building of the wall, and everything!
why haven't we learned anything? why do we, as americans still not question? or why do we ask the wrong questions? why does the media fail us everytime? instead of hearing Ahmadinajad or other leaders in the ME saying hateful, violent things against Israel, and saying, "oh, well, they are anti-semitic and clearly enemies of israel and america and freedom and all that is good," why don't we ever ask, why does he say those kind of things? what would cause someone to hate another country that really poses no threat to them? that doesn't make sense. you cannot accept irrational explanations. it's the same type of bullshit they through at us after 9/11--they hate us because of our freedom. i was 13 and i knew that was crap and it didn't make sense. it felt like i was in those sunday school classes you always read about in atheist/agnostic memoirs, where the author heroically asked hard questions until the teacher couldn't answer them anymore, "that's just the way it is, okay?!" never mind that it doesn't make sense. believe. why do you accept that as an answer? don't ever accept that as an answer! why do they hate us because of our freedom? why does Ahmadinajad and Hamas and Zachariah Sheik and so many others want to destroy Israel? the answer is out there, just like it is for religion, you just can't let the Authority, sunday school or the news media or politicians, tell you that it's not. don't let them tell you they already have the answer. especially when you know that can't possibly be the answer. that's just the way it is. they hate us because of our freedom. israel is always the good guy, the victim, and the ally.
because accepting that, that's worse than bias, to accept answers that you know don't make sense. that's worse than unknown unknowns, because that is a known unknown, and one you don't care enough about to find the answer to.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!!
one hint i've used to detect this unknown unknown is i probably have some sort of bias when i just can't manage to be on the same communication planet as someone else--where you have No Idea where they are coming from, and there is basically no point where you can reference. If you realize the difference, it's not something that you can breach because....well, you just can't. you can't let yourself sink to that level. that's the bias. you know (think) you're right.
let me put this in concretes.
there were a number of things that absolutely disturbed me about the presidential foreign policy debate and the VP debate, but the number one issue was the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and how it is talked about and portrayed in the debates and by the US mass media.
For example, yesterday the VPs discussed the issue at length, for a whole segment or so. but not ONCE did they even SAY the word Palestine or Palestinians. not even the word. no comments. no references. just unabashed, unfettered declarations of love for Israel. Biden and Palin were in complete agreement about their undying, loving devotion to Israel, and their running mates, based on the last debate and other past statements, are in absolute agreement as well. its unanimous: the next administration no matter who is elected offers no bright light at the end of the tunnel for Palestinians (or the LGBT community, either, but that's a whole 'nother disgusting issue of disappointment). Palin even had the gall to mention that they would work toward building an embassy in Jerusalem. i mean, holy shit! freaking sign Palin up for the likud party! grrr....
the point is, current US foreign policy on israel/palestine is completely not on the same planet i am. i don't understand how it could possibly BE the way it is, and you know, i don't think i want to. cuz i think i'm right. bias.
some examples of things i absolutely do not understand:
1) why does everyone trip over each other to pay homage to israel? why does everyone que up to kiss israel's ass? sure, its our "only ally in the middle east." but saddam hussein was our ally as long as it served our interests, and as soon as it didn't anymore...yeah. being our ally has nothing to do with being the "good guy" (http://www.jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/breaking/110568.html) or being "right" or noble or anything like that. it's politics. i guess i understand that, as in i know how it works. and i guess that its our ally because its the only other democracy in the region, but if you want to claim israel as a democracy with all its human right abuses, than you should be able to claim turkey as one, too, and we don't really have anything to do with them (though i guess we ignore the plight of the turkey's kurdish population just as much as we do the palestinians, if not more, so look! it is the same). and is it really because israel is the holy blessed country of god's chosen people or something? thats another one of those religious notions that i always thought, before i came to The BYU, that no one really thinks like that anymore, along with other "duh" issues like women's rights and evolution, and sadly, there have been waaaaay too many times where my hopeful notions of what general sanity means have been proven to be just naivete (sure, bias, i suppose). so i wish that wasn't a factor, but the sad truth is it probably is. I'd just have to do a survey of my sunday school class to find out, but i don't want to take a chance on wounding my fragile testimony or organized religion.
2) why does everyone continue to ignore the fact that the israelis participate in illegal actions? I feel like anytime there is ever, Ever, just one remark that shows the Palestinians as victims, or mentions that hey, guess what, it sucks for 1.5 million people to live in a tiny strip of land with no access to economic resources or control of their own power or food sources and little to no infrastructure and be denied the right to leave, or that hundreds of illegal jewish settlers in the west bank violently attack palestinian villages and people, if anything like that is ever said, then it's all, "the israelis have got to protect themselves!" and man, have they gotten good at 'protecting' themselves. obviously, being such good allies of the US, they took a page out of our Iraqi/WoT handbook and decided that the best defense is a killer offense. These are some of my favorite (read:disgusting) statistics: http://www.btselem.org/English/Statistics/Casualties.asp
check out the rest of the website, B'Tselem, an Israeli Human Rights group. it's powerful. and its undeniable--the israelis are guilty guilty guilty, just as guilty of terrible crimes and offenses, if not more so at this point, than the Palestinians are. How could you ever say that it's "clear" who the bad guys are? okay. that sounds resonable. not.
3) what the heck the media is doing. that i cannot understand, in this situation, or in a million other situations around the world. i pull up CNN today, and all the "breaking news" links are about skinny dippers in japan and the view hosts and way way WAY too many useless gossip articles about the presidential candidates, and not anything new or useful or factual. i had to go through about 17 other articles in the newswire feed to find 3 paragraphs talking about violent deaths between feuding factions in Northwest India were over 40 people have died. but oh, my bad, you are right. that is not important, and neither are deaths in Palestine and in Iraq, and no one cares about Afghanistan anymore except Obama (sellout. don't even get me started). so yes, please tell us something vague and completely uninformative about the destruction of our economy and the democratic system.
so So many other things to say!
But this is ridiculous. because here's the thing: i know i'm not biased, i'm just searching for truth and answers. i don't want to wipe jews off the face of the planet or destroy israel or extract people, anyone!, from their homeland. Israel is a political, socio-economic, viable entity, and however it came about, it is there, and that's that. you have a right to exist. i saw some pro-Palestinian graffiti in Bethlehem once, and it read "to exist is to resist," and i like it a lot, especially because it was so true, and so ironic, because little did the artist know that it applies to both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. they both exist there. they are both going to have to find a way to exist there. to exist is to resist, and that goes for all things in existence, Israeli or Palestinian or Kurd or Tibetan or whatever. no one wants to destroy israel just because they don't think they have the right to be there--that's not what all those "extremists" that call for israel's destruction are saying. they are saying stop the madness. stop the oppression. stop the blockades and the discrimination and the illegal settlements and illegal building of the wall, and everything!
why haven't we learned anything? why do we, as americans still not question? or why do we ask the wrong questions? why does the media fail us everytime? instead of hearing Ahmadinajad or other leaders in the ME saying hateful, violent things against Israel, and saying, "oh, well, they are anti-semitic and clearly enemies of israel and america and freedom and all that is good," why don't we ever ask, why does he say those kind of things? what would cause someone to hate another country that really poses no threat to them? that doesn't make sense. you cannot accept irrational explanations. it's the same type of bullshit they through at us after 9/11--they hate us because of our freedom. i was 13 and i knew that was crap and it didn't make sense. it felt like i was in those sunday school classes you always read about in atheist/agnostic memoirs, where the author heroically asked hard questions until the teacher couldn't answer them anymore, "that's just the way it is, okay?!" never mind that it doesn't make sense. believe. why do you accept that as an answer? don't ever accept that as an answer! why do they hate us because of our freedom? why does Ahmadinajad and Hamas and Zachariah Sheik and so many others want to destroy Israel? the answer is out there, just like it is for religion, you just can't let the Authority, sunday school or the news media or politicians, tell you that it's not. don't let them tell you they already have the answer. especially when you know that can't possibly be the answer. that's just the way it is. they hate us because of our freedom. israel is always the good guy, the victim, and the ally.
because accepting that, that's worse than bias, to accept answers that you know don't make sense. that's worse than unknown unknowns, because that is a known unknown, and one you don't care enough about to find the answer to.
THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
