A Matter of Faith
It was somewhat ironic that the two letters to the editor that were printed in the hard copy of the J&C for the 1st (the two at the bottom here) were both in praise of bigotry because Jesus says so (?). I decided to hurry up and type this one once I found out that they actually don't allow you to view articles for free after a week has passed (thus showing that my job isn't quite as pointless as I thought). This factor means that I have no way of looking up exactly the context of the latter letter, but the former provides much material for me.
Gay partnerships devastate families
Hard core gay activists are understandably afraid of the amendment banning gay marriage. It will permanently block progressive judges' and the American Civil Liberties Union's attempts to usurp the Constitution.
Most states where gay marriage is now illegal are passing amendments. Indiana will eventually join them for the good of America. Current Indiana House Democrats, including local Rep. Sheila Klinker, should be ashamed of their leaders' failure to uphold the democratic process by blatantly denying the right to vote on this vital social issue. They have violated the public trust and deserve loud reprimand.
This country cannot sweep gay partnerships under the rug as just another lifestyle we might as well accept as inevitable. The only thing inevitable is the utter devastation families suffer when a member announces he or she is gay. Our entitlement culture does not guarantee a right to break the rules of humankind, but irresponsible Democrats have allowed a lifestyle undeniably diametric to natural law to remain unchallenged.
To people who think defending America against an unhealthy, divisive lifestyle is bigoted and homophobic, I suggest you recall the reaction of your family when you or a loved one confessed a desire for a same-sex partner. Therein lies the problem, and our people need to get serious about solving it so future generations are free of the turmoil we face today. This modern age of medical breakthroughs and miracle drugs should hold the answer.
Jan Lehnen
Lafayette
Admittedly, the writer is not hateful in any way, and in a way, this makes it even more disturbing. She believes that she is right, and that her policies are for the good of the people involved. She doesn't say anything about religion, instead citing that it's "unnatural" and that the solution is to develop new artificial drugs to make the "patients" natural again, and that it is the right way of the world to be horrified and devastated when someone you know turns out to be gay. However, her assertion that something outside the norm is unnatural makes it difficult for me to think that she believes in evolution, which narrows the field somewhat. (I just heard on TV a few hours ago that 39% of Americans surveyed claimed to be Creationists, and that was somewhat disconcerting to me.)
These beliefs that you are right based on faith are a sticky subject. By definition, you believe that your beliefs are correct, and in the case of many Christian denominations, that means you believe that anyone who disagrees is going to hell unless you save her. This means that it is only morally right to make other beliefs illegal. The remark about usurping the Constitution above is related to the popular opinion that the Founding Fathers only intended freedom of religion to include Christianity (despite many of them being Deists), a claim that is obviously impossible to prove either way at this point. Personally, I believe that rights apply to everyone except those who harm others, not just those who are believed to be harming others by certain people, and that if the letter of the Declaration and Constitution doesn't mean that (which I think it does), it should be amended so.
Another difficult question is the problem of how people come to have faith in the first place. By definition, it cannot be based on any physical evidence, which is also the argument against attempts to disprove religion. Consequently, the primary way people develop their beliefs is through what they experience, mostly through following what they're told by the people they respect during their developmental years. I'm not a scientist, so if I had been born one generation earlier on my father's side, I would probably be a Christian. My staunch atheism is based perhaps entirely on the fact that I was raised among people who relied on physical logic rather than spiritual things. This has of course been a problem ever since the first two religions encountered each other, so unsurprisingly, I don't have a solution for it just yet.
I also take issue with the assertion that an individual's coming out will always destroy those close to her. I can't see why this would be the case except if the kith and kin in question believe there is something wrong with it, which many do not. This thus ends up being another claim that other beliefs are wrong. I know I can't say much from personal experience, but in my narrow-diametered circle of acquaintances, I have seen half a dozen homes wrecked, including my own. In all but one case, this was because the straight man of the house had a different idea of fidelity than anyone else. (People weren't too straightforward about the exception, but I gather that it was already a same-sex couple.) I think that denying and suppressing what one is only leads to things getting worse, as I imagine is much of the problem with all those Catholic priests and Ms. Winfrey's school in South Africa.
As I've had in my notes for many moons and never gotten around to fleshing out into a post, it would really be nice if I could find a secular state somewhere to live. I know that wouldn't solve anyone else's problems, but at least I wouldn't have to deal with them. That's my answer to most of life, after all.
On a somewhat darker (or at least neutral) note, Ms. ![[info]](http://p-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif)
mizuno_youko just posted an interesting link.
