Sunday, November 2, 2008

I want to be honest.

It's funny how hard that can be, sometimes.

I'm an unapologetic Obama supporter.

My biggest issue with Proposition 8 is the Church's unrelenting, overstepping involvement in it. I don't like how they call those who wish to marry "selfish" (and I could cite if you'd like) because they won't be able to naturally "multiply and replenish the Earth." I get why the Church felt the need to state a position, but this is really over the top.

That said, I've read up on the Church's involvement with the Civil Rights movement - there were Scriptures abound that totally went against what the Church was saying. I understand that gay marriage is a bit more complicated than that. That said, I believe marriage is a good thing. I don't believe we should force our beliefs onto all people - I would hate it if Catholicism, for example, tried to make divorces illegal.

I'm just pissed off at the attitudes. Aside from the "selfish" thing (which is just so damned divisive and wrong I can hardly stand it), there are far too many members of this church who can't seem to find an ounce of compassion or an ounce of ability to really see what it is like to be gay in this world. Especially in the church. It's unbelievable. It's like people forget our gay brothers and sisters are people too.

Go read When Your 15-Year-Old Son Says “I’m Gay”

Please. Just read it.

Homophobia exists everywhere, granted, but there is a special kind of homophobia that exists in the Christian churches including our own. I've seen it, heard it, and it's just so unbelievably un-Christlike to make me sick.

Aside from that, I deleted a post I published yesterday. There were a few things I think I said out of more anger than anything else. Yes, I've heard that some in the church suggested the "negroes" deserved all the rights they were given and that God put them on their own continent for a reason. That said, our church was against the Civil Rights Movement. Accept it.

We were against the Equal Rights Amendment. What I forgot in my zeal is that, as far as my knowledge of the amendment appropriates (I haven't looked at it in a long time), I'm against it too. I just think it's lame that we have a history of saying things like this will ruin the family.

Our Church highly, strongly encourages the women to stay home. I stay home. I think it's best for the kids - but I want and need to work. It's why I blog, it's why I write. I'm not wired to be June Cleaver, and I tired about a year ago of trying to be June Cleaver. I get annoyed at all the women who try so hard because I don't buy it. That doesn't mean there aren't women who sincerely love it and don't want to do anything else (has anyone heard of the Duggars? Holy hell! I won't judge her, but holy hell! There's one woman absolutely wired to be a mommy), but my life is not my kids. I don't consider myself a feminist, but I definitely hold some of their ideals close to my heart. I also like being taken care of by my guy :)

Some women make better mommies when they work. I don't know that I'm one of them, but I know of a few off hand who do.

I do think our church has some issues regarding women and brushing them aside. I do. I've seen it. I've heard of it - like in Sunday School with the story of the stake president asking a newly called bishop's wife what she thought of the just extended call. She said "I don't like it." His response was a virtual "too bad."

What the hell.

Yes, a lot of things make me very angry. I'm a pretty angry person about a few things right now. I've got a lot going on in my head and it's not going anywhere. Part of it may be due to just my own personal life right now. I'm on my own a lot. I don't have a large circle of friends in the area - I don't relate with or share interests with a lot of women in the Church. I never really have. As much as I would like to hang out with someone, I'm just not that type. It would have to be someone who would just let me be. Someone who could make themselves at home. Someone I wouldn't have to entertain. A kindred spirit. Someone who wouldn't fuel the fire anymore than it already is. I don't need nudging. I just need an unbiased ear.

I'm angry, and I am confused (about some things). I also know what I know, and I'm acknowledging things I've tucked into the back of my mind because they deserve to be acknowledged - because if you don't they come back to bite you in the ass. I've got the bitemarks. I don't want any more.


Noe said...

being a stay-at-home-mom sucks sometimes... I'm glad I work, and I'm happy that the internet exists for without it I would go insane... You need an "Ellen" who comes over once or twice a week and sits on the couch with you drinking wine and watching the child play... the "cool aunt" who comes over to see you and the kids for entirely different reasons and serves a purpose... it's nice.

laura said...

Lisa -
I read your post on Mormon Democrats and emailed it to our friends and family. I thought I would check out your blog.

I think if I went to your ward that we would most likely be friends. It's difficult being a democrat in our church, especially in the center of the Bible Belt where we live. We are the only couple in our ward with an Obama bumper sticker and we wear it with pride. So I can understand your frustration when you speak of women's roles within the church and the expectation that we are supposed to be stay-at-home soccer moms who live only to serve our children. As a new mom myself who has always had a job, it has been difficult deciding what to do about work.

I do, however, have some concerns about your stance on prop. 8. Recently, I have heard members say that they will not support the Church on this one. You say "I don't believe we should force our beliefs onto all people -." But if anyone is forcing anything, I have to believe that it is the courts who ignored the vote and voice of the people.

That being said, I agree with you that our church could do a better job of reaching out to those who suffer with same-sex attraction.
Fortunately, I went to a college that allowed me to associate with many homosexuals on a regular basis. In no way do I consider myself to be homophobic, and for that I credit the diversity of my school.

Like you, I believe that homosexuals deserve all the same civil liberties that you and I enjoy. But under the domestic partnership law in CA, they already receive the same rights that married couples enjoy. Furthermore, the consitution already guarantees all of us our inalienable rights, those rights that the government cannot give nor take away (i.e. free speech, the right to assemble, etc)I don't consider marriage itself to be a civil right because not everyone can do it, it isn't universal. You have to be a certain age and you can't marry a relative. Nor can you marry multiple people at once.

Rather, marriage is an institution, albeit an imperfect one. By denying homosexuals access to this institution, I do not believe we are denying rights. For example, I don't have the "right" to become a member of the National Organization of Women if I'm a man. The institution requires me to meet certain criteria, inluding being of the proper gender. By changing the meaning of the instution to include men, it undermines the purpose and meaning of the group.

I guess what I was trying to say and got sidetracked was this: I know it is difficult for many of us to support this proposition. But a prophet of God has asked us to do it. We don't always know why and perhaps we won't learn the reasons until the next life. I came across this scripture the other day when pondering this very issue.

"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God."

So let's be careful when we are dicussing this issue that we don't confuse the laws of God with the foolishness of men. It is all too appealing to rationalize the things we do not fully understand by giving in and simply saying, "God made me this way." (By the way, homosexuality is one of my number one questions for God in the next life.)

Another great scripture in Corinthians "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man; but God is faithful who will not suffer you to be tempted above that which ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it."

If we believe the church is true, then we know that our prophet will always lead us in righteous paths. I can't imagine that it was easy for the pioneers to follow the prophet out west with no end in sight. I'm sure folks though they were stark crazy. I can't imagine it was easy for them to watch their loved ones perish on the trail. Likwise, I can't imagine that it was easy for Noah to build an ark when there was no sign of a flood. In fact, the scriptures have shown us time and time again that following the Lord is not easy. It has definitely never been popular. I don't care if I'm on the wrong side of history as long as I'm on the side of the Lord.

Hope this doesn't offend. Just thought I'd put in my two cents. I enjoy reading your blog. It's nice to know I'm not the only mormon democrat out there.
Keep writing!

Lisa said...


My husband suspects there are more of "us" in the Church than we know. We tend to be a quiet group. Maybe he's right :)

Yours is the first argument I've heard in a while that bears some weight with me, to be honest. The idea that marriage is a "right" isn't something I've really researched out. I know the Courts have called it a right - but we know the Courts, too. I may quote them, but I understand that (however intelligent and learned), Justices are men too.

Speaking of the Courts and ignoring the will of the people, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree--in this way:

Yes, 61% of the people voted for marriage = man + woman

Back in the day, the 1940's I believe, the majority of the population believed interracial marriage to be wrong and against God, etc. The Courts found that unconstitutional and overturned the law.

Even a decade later, the majority of the people still disagreed. Would we disagree now? No. Not the majority of us, at least.

As for the trek West, I'm more than happy I was not one of them. Sometimes I wonder if we romanticize that too much. That must have been something beyond torture. Strong people.

My problem with the "domestic partnership" is that the word doesn't carry near the amount of weight that "marriage" does. And until we overturn DOMA, homosexual couples will never truly have the same rights heterosexual couples do.

Just seems kinda off to me, really.

Anyway, thank you for the new thought (and for dissenting in such a...well, cool way). No offense taken at all. Glad you commented - feel free to do so more often :D

Lisa said...

Whenever I'm confronted with an argument I think holds some weight, I look for weaknesses.

It's what I do. It's a great way to win debates :)

Anyway, I really am trying to understand this, so after failing on my own, I turned to my husband and recounted your argument, Laura, that said marriage isn't a right because it has some age criteria involved.

My husband answered: Is voting a right?

There you go. I think I'm going to look into this more over the next day. Interesting stuff.

Heather said...


FABULOUS comments!!

Lisa, shows maturity of character to consider others views. I'll find your # sometime this week and hopefully have a car so we can do ice cream or the park or whatever...