I’ve decided to try something new. Posts divided into categories so I don’t have to write as many transitions!
A few states, including Michigan and Ohio, have had an appeals court respond to same-sex marriage bans in the affirmative. This has, predictably, caused an uproar. The crowd that has made it their motto to do away with hate, intolerance, and judgment has spent their evening posting hateful, intolerant, and judgmental poison on as many news articles as they can find. I know this, because to my shame, I attempted to engage a few of them and wasted a good portion of my night on the effort.
I try to be polite and kind in such discussions, because my goal is to win people on the sideline. I have been crafting a summary “blurb” I can just copy/paste on those sorts of threads. I made it intentionally “nice” and used no religious arguments; I’ve found that most people are so disdainful of religion that merely mentioning it distracts them too much to communicate in whole sentences.
People on the fence can take a reasonable, historical, philosophical, coherent argument presented nicely and compare it to pure hatred. I wish I was exaggerating.
My argument is straightforward and simple. First, I declare I have no interest in debate, something which is usually true. This is followed by many appeals for the reader to give my side a chance and to avoid calling it names. It would be wonderful if this were not necessary. Following this, I present a concise yet profound history and meaning of the word “marriage” itself which I have co-opted from a man whose intelligence dwarfs mine and who I have the utmost respect for, considering we have never met.
Finally, I present this:
Of course, you can call whatever you want “marriage” – it is in the end, just a word – but the fact that human beings still require a mother and a father and most people think both of ‘em should stick around for their children means that some special relationship exists as a result of how human beings continue the species. People can ignore or accept human nature, but they aren’t going to change it.
And I think this is right to the point. Words are proxies; they don’t mean anything on their own but signify something that does mean something. If “marriage” is changed to mean something else, the relationship at the basis of human flourishing is going to get a new name. So be it, I guess. But it is an awfully confusing route to take for people to get tax breaks that only make sense for parents with children.
There is no clamor for male “mothers”, female “fathers”, or child “parents”, despite the fact there are benefits to all the roles.
Brittany Maynard took her life after discovering she had cancer. This was followed up by article after article documenting people who were diagnosed with her form of cancer and told they had months to live and who then recovered.
I read a great article in response to the whole concept of assisted suicide. Highlights include:
“I first think it’s odd since if any activity could be safely assumed to require no assistance, suicide is it.”
“Assisted suicide can’t be merely a call for an effective means or one that avoids making a mess. It is rather making the more interesting and controversial claim that death is medicine”
“If even death is no longer such a criteria, we are left only with choice: if I want X and medicine gives me X, then the medicine is effective. But there has to be more to it than this, since persons can be mistaken about what they want, or otherwise incapable of seeing it.”
“But if one can be mistaken about whether he should die, he can be mistaken about whether he should live. The role of the standards is to talk the first group out of suicide and the second group into it.”
Another thing I would add is that it seems Miss Maynard’s knowledge of her cancer was more hazardous to her health than the cancer itself; had she survived the cancer, she may have lived decades more.
I don’t listen to talk radio very often, sticking mostly with podcasts, but this morning I listened to part of Rush Limbaugh’s show and a caller received a free iPad for an idea that I had before the time he said it occurred to him: That if people wanted the congress to work with Obama, they would have elected Democrats, not Republicans.
I am jealous.
I’m over a month into learning Latin from this book. It has gone well, and while it takes me a while to get through the material – longer than I would like – I tend to get translations and pronunciations correct. Gloria Romanum! Well, to their language at least. It’s a lot of fun.