Posted by: zhak39 | February 9, 2009

Love Will Prevail

Brought to my attention by my loving sister, passing it on to you. If it is your inclination, please go to the Courage Campaign and see what they have to say. And if you wish to support this effort, you may sign a petition, closing February 14, 2009.  With love,  ZhaK

Vodpod videos no longer available.

more about “Love Will Prevail“, posted with vodpod

Advertisements

Responses

  1. As a divorce lawyer, this issue is a real mixed bag for me. On the one hand, I think there is much wisdom in the words of Kinky Friedman, to the effect that GBLT folks should have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us. Also, I agree with the notion that BGLT folks should be as entitled to the property rights of married folks as married folks.

    I read over the weekend about perhaps my favorite photographer, Annie Liebovitz, who filed for bankruptcy because when her partner, Susan Sontag died, Annie was left with all the debts, but little of the assets, of Ms. Sontag. Of course, Ms. Sontag’s son has recently begun publishing diary entries of his mother, for profit, while poor Annie was left trying to afford Susan’s extravagancies.

    I also have had friends and relatives die of AIDS and I am certain the GBLT lifestyle is not one chosen “to be different.” The consequences are too dire. And even someone flirting with those/that lifestyle(s) will see pretty quickly if you’re making a choice, the far easier choice is heterosexuality. Which again leads me to believe it’s not a choice at all.

    Also, as a lawyer, I believe in the fundamental notion that people have a couple of constitutional rights, among them equal protection under the laws, and a right of privacy. I continually find it frustrating — no, maddening — that folks of a certain political persuasion detest government interference in our lives when it comes to things like public prayer and home schooling and taxation, yet on the other hand have absolutely no issue with the government interfering with individual choices about abortion or about uniting with people we love.

    Yet, I confess there is a part of me — a part of me that, I admit is biased because of my own sexual proclivity — that thinks there is something unnatural about the whole GLBT concept. But I admit when I say it that this part of me is completely based upon ME and who I AM.

    So I sit back and I look at it and I have decided that, it’s not my place to say, one way or the other. In much the same way that I want to be left alone about a whole variety of issues I deal with as a person, I have determined I will leave others alone to decide issues in their personal lives.

    The amusing thing to me is, such a position does not fit neatly into either political philosophy. If I were liberal, I would want the rights protected, as an human right. I don’t. If I were conservative, I would feel guilty about my own predisposition because the predisposition in, and of, itself, might draw me to interfere with the free exercise of GLBT lifestyles. I don’t feel guilty about my predisposition.

    I’m just realistic enough to accept that I would not wish my life on anybody and refuse to force it on anybody either.

    Incidentally, before the U.S. Supreme Court issues its decision in this case, I expect that the Iowa Supreme Court will issue a decision on whether refusing to issue marriage licenses to same sex couples is a constitutional violation of the equal protection clause. I do hope, one way or the other, that the Iowa Supreme Court does not withhold its ruling in anticipation of the United States Supreme Court’s ruling. The issues are fundamentally different and, if worse comes to worst, Iowa’s court may have to alter future decisions in light of the Supreme Court’s decision.

    But people need to know locally. Lives are hanging in the balance.

  2. Hi Bill. I’m glad you gave this thoughtful consideration.

    Marriage in this country seems to defy division of secular and religious. I don’t understand why people don’t have a civil union in the eyes of the law and if they so choose, a blessing by their particular religious institution. The legal status and religious sacrament could be mutually exclusive. Having ministers perform a civil function muddies the water.

    Let me know what happens in Iowa.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: