Tuesday, November 11, 2008
What can I say about the election? The candidate I (reluctantly) voted for in the Presidential race won. The majority of the people of California then turned away from his message of change and hope and voted to make me an official second-class citizen of my native state. Overall, I think the United States did well, and California will eventually recover from this stain on its reputation as a social and cultural leader.
Happy? Not really. Moving on though. As I posted elsewhere before the election, it had become apparent that Proposition 8 wasn't going to end debate on marriage equality on November 4. I'm convinced the battle will continue, both in California and elsewhere , and marriage equality will eventually win out.
I will admit to a fit of schadenfreude giggles at seeing that Alaska re-elected convicted Republican Senator Ted Stevens to office. Call it a guilty pleasure it you will, but it felt good.
On that note, I'll leave you with some other thoughts on the recent electoral results: Kyle Cummings , Michael McAllister , and Joe Crawford . All three are unique Californians that add plenty to the diversity of opinion (and styles) on the internet and are well worth a few minutes of your time.
Matthew C. Scallon
November 13, 2008 at 01:58 AM
Supporters of Prop 8 ran television ads calling opponents the pedogogical equivalent of child abuse. Opponent of Prop 8 ran television ads calling supporters bigots. And two things especially sadden me. One is that my homosexual friends, thanks to the California Supreme Court, were set up for this downfall, a downfall that has turned ugly, especially outside of Mormon stakes. Second is this all could have been avoided with stronger POA statutes or civil unions or both --perhaps having the State get out of the marriage business altogether-- with no one the worse for wear. The whole mess left a layer of slime on me that has taken five days to wash off. At least, I hope it's off.
Chuck from Escondido
November 13, 2008 at 07:48 PM
What you and many others never seem to get is that separate but equal is discrimination. Even if there are legalistic alternatives like powers of attorney and civil unions and every time two California couples have to go though different steps to get to the same outcome, the discrimination is felt. Every couple who has had to explain to a call center operator or customer service representative what kind of civil union or domestic partnership they have, or produce extra documentation beyond that of a heterosexual couple, or pay for legal help to make certain their rights are going to be enforceable and transportable to a new job or new home knows just how unequal the so-called substitutes for the word "marriage" are. The word is important and essential because it conveys a clear and unambiguous meaning of the rights, privileges and responsibilities that couple is entitled to under the law and has committed to between themselves. The Supreme Court didn't set me or anyone else up, and I have no problem with the ugliness. As one of the better protest signs goes, No More Mr. Nice Gay.
Julie from San Diego
November 13, 2008 at 11:31 PM
The Supreme Court decision was very sweeping. They did find that choosing a person with whom to form a family is a universal human right. But they also held that you cannot treat someone differently under the law because of their sexual orientation. The latter will have affects far beyond the marriage issue. It will be interesting to see how the court reconciles the new constitutional amendment with their broader finding. (Personally, I hope they find that ANY differences between "civil unions/domestic partnerships" and "marriage" are now unconstitutional.)
Matthew C. Scallon
November 14, 2008 at 12:48 AM
@Chuck, I'm sorry you feel that way. I harbor no ill will toward you. In fact, you changed my mind over Proposition 1A, but, if that feeling's not mutual, I can deal. By "ugly," I mean the vandalism and the muggings. I hope that's not what you mean. You're in my prayers.
November 14, 2008 at 01:07 AM
Matt - You are in my prayers, hopes and wishes as well - most of them involve enlightenment...
Matthew C. Scallon
November 14, 2008 at 04:38 AM
@Chris, "You ask but do not receive, because you ask wrongly, to spend it on your passions." James 4:3 (NAB) I would have accepted Chris' prayers were it not for the snarkiness at the end. That's a shame.
November 14, 2008 at 08:12 PM
"The good man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks.â Luke 6:45 Jesus never said a word against homosexuality. Matt - you misunderstand again - I was praying for you, not to you. You are in no position to accept or deny my prayers. No snarkiness here - I want to help carry you forward and bring you to a less narrow vision of the world, it's a shame for anyone to be left behind. Chris
Matthew C. Scallon
November 14, 2008 at 09:10 PM
@Chris: "Jesus never said a word against homosexuality. The historically accurate statement is that the Scriptures don't record Jesus saying anything about homosexuality. Now, I could say something about time machines, tape recorders, and Aramaic-to-English dictionaries, but, instead, I will point out that Jesus said that marriage is to be between a man and a woman without divorce (cf. Mark 10:1-10). If Jesus wanted to change Mosaic law further by including conjugal relationships between two men or two women, that would have been the place to do it. He didn't, or, more accurately, Scripture doesn't record Him doing it. If you have some extra-scriptural patristic scroll saying otherwise, please provide your citation. Matt - you misunderstand again - I was praying for you, not to you. You are in no position to accept or deny my prayers. Chris doesn't understand that the word "accepted" has different meanings. There's the meaning of "received," which Chris obviously understands, and the meaning of "taken as authentic," which Chris obviously doesn't understand. No snarkiness here - I want to help carry you forward and bring you to a less narrow vision of the world, itâs a shame for anyone to be left behind. And so Chris disclaims snarkiness by continuing it. If Chris intended no snarkiness, then the phrase which follows the dash and precedes the ellipsis would be unnecessary. Perhaps, in that narrow echo chamber where everyone agrees with Chris and no one disagrees, Chris doesn't know how to broaden himself enough to reach out in charity. Very well. I'll help Chris out by showing Chris how to pray for someone. I include Chris in my prayers. No dashes. No ellipses.
November 14, 2008 at 09:38 PM
This is snarky: Not sure why, but here I am again riding the Matt Scallon ad nasuem roller coaster... This is not snarky: It must be nice to be in a position to judge the authenticity of another person's prayers - why would you think it inauthentic that I pray for your enlightenment regarding the fundamental right that all human beings joined in loving relationships be able to share the same equal rights? It's a shame that your God seems only able to so clearly communicate his will to straight folks like yourself - or that gay and other tolerant folks are just too thick headed to hear your God. Thank you for the Christian attitude in looking out for my welfare by including me in your prayers, seriously. But I would have to know what specifically your praying for before I would "accept" your wishes for my sexual preference free soul. If your heaven doesn't include gay people - this straight guy ain't interested. Chris I guess I am at a disadvantage here Matt
Matthew C. Scallon
November 14, 2008 at 11:45 PM
@Chris: This is snarky: Not sure why, but here I am again riding the Matt Scallon ad nasuem roller coasterâ¦ Chris can start his own blog posting and leave Chuck out of it, if Chris wants. It would demonstrate some sensitivity, given what he went through last week. "This is not snarky: It must be nice to be in a position to judge the authenticity of another personâs prayers - why would you think it inauthentic that I pray for your enlightenment regarding the fundamental right that all human beings joined in loving relationships be able to share the same equal rights? Itâs a shame that your God seems only able to so clearly communicate his will to straight folks like yourself - or that gay and other tolerant folks are just too thick headed to hear your God." And this is Chris when he's not being snarky. Before Chris stands in judgement of my God, as he so unsnarkily (word?) puts it, perhaps he should research what one certain group of Christians says about the treatment of my homosexual brothers and sisters. No doubt, Chris will disagree with this group of Christians, but, alike Chris, this group won't judge Chris as unenlightened and narrow, because this group of Christians is too tolerant to be that uncharitable to Chris. "Thank you for the Christian attitude in looking out for my welfare by including me in your prayers, seriously. But I would have to know what specifically your praying for before I would âacceptâ your wishes for my sexual preference free soul. If your heaven doesnât include gay people - this straight guy ainât interested." When I called upon another commenter's shared Christianity on a different blog post, the Web manager called me sarcastic and threatened to bar me from the site. It would be ironic to have the same thing happen to one of the professional Citizen Voices bloggers. Anyway, to answer Chris' question --and it's a fair question-- it was the same prayer I prayed for Chuck on my trolley ride to work this morning. I prayed that God bless him with all of His grace, that God keep him safe, that God richly bless him both now and in the world to come. If Chris can't accept that, I can deal.
November 15, 2008 at 01:36 AM
Well, I hope I'm as lucky in your prayers as Chuck certainly is and I blush at your accidental flattery in reference to my professionality - thank you kindly - you are a dear man, a prince and a peach and kiss on the cheek. I don't think your voice is being muted, I have experienced KPBS as predominately interested in a desire for civil debate - I think we got our fair share. Anyway Salud! Mateo! and may your family be wealthy in health and happiness. Chris May you and your family and loved ones be wealthy in health and happiness. And may our mutual happiness cross paths
November 15, 2008 at 01:38 AM
whoops I accidentally exposed my full prayer for you up there - my cards are on the table
Please stay on topic and be as concise as possible. Leaving a comment means you agree to our Community Discussion Rules. We like civilized discourse. We don't like spam, lying, profanity, harassment or personal attacks.