metaphysics

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 :).