Broken Corset

December 5, 2010

Isn’t There Anyone Who Knows What Christmas is All About?

My title is one of my favorite quotes, from one of my favorite Christmas specials.  Good ol’ Charlie Brown – and his dilapidated tree – “all it needed was a little love” Linus tells us…  and with that line, he seems to answer the question – what is Christmas all about? Love.  Christmas is about love.  For unto us a child was born – and he came to save the world – a sign of God’s love for us.  It might possibly be one of the most beautiful stories told.

I can easily swing from the Charlie Brown story into the Christmas Song by Dave Matthews… It tells the story of Jesus in a beautifully sad tone, reminding us of the people Jesus spent time with – people who were “less than golden hearted” – and of how the world in his presence and afterward was filled with love…  “love, love is all around”.

It probably wouldn’t be fair to call myself a Christian.  But at Christmastime, I can easily become captivated by the beauty of the tale and the message of love.  And I always love the music of the season… my favorites are the more haunting pieces like What Child is This? (Greensleeves melody).

And within the Christmas story, I can’t help but think of Mary.  How scary it would be to have an angel visit you, to bear the child of God…. to travel great distances, and give birth in a manger.  Amy Grant’s Breath of Heaven gets at it… And I think of how motherhood has changed my life, and yet Mary is barely discussed.  But Mary is close to my heart this season, as is the gift of motherhood- because while she’s not at the center of Christianity, for a bit at Christmas, she’s got a starring role.  And if you are a mom, you know that being a mom is a starring role – even if it’s also often unappreciated.

Now, I want to tell you a story about another mom, and it’s a scary story too…  and if you bear with me, I’ll eventually get to how it’s all related.

Lisa Howe is about to become a mother.  A successful soccer coach at Belmont University in Tennessee, she will add motherhood to her resume beginning in May.  As ANY mom knows…  it will change her life.  If everything goes well, she will be exhausted, emotionally strung out, and probably sick a lot more for a few years.  She will also come to work with spit up or crumbs in her hair and clothes, and probably feel a need now and then to tell a few annoying stories about the baby’s first word or first steps.  Annoying of course, only to the jaded of the world… miraculous and amazing to Lisa… and wonderfully sweet to those who care about her.

Anyway, no surprise… she decided to tell her soccer team about the great expectation – I mean, you seriously can’t hide being a mom… even if you could somehow hide the pregnancy.

And that is where she ran into problems. Because as it turns out, Lisa is not carrying this sweet little being… her partner is.  And because of that fact, Lisa was fired.  Okay, so Belmont says she wasn’t fired, nor did she resign….  but apparently it was communicated that she would be fired, so she chose instead to leave.

Belmont is a Catholic University… and if you don’t know where the Catholics stand on gay marriage… well, you haven’t been paying attention.  And so Lisa, her life being out of step with Catholic values was no longer welcome.  According to a few articles, if she hadn’t left before the baby was born, she would have had to leave afterward, because, like I said… you just can’t hide a baby.

But this is where I am so lost.  I mean….  don’t the Catholics know what Christmas is all about??  Am I am so uninformed that I am confused???  Because my understanding of things was that Jesus was born to all of us, that Jesus welcomed everyone , that he associated with people regardless of whether he agreed with them.  And I thought that when he died it was for everyone too.  Isn’t Christmas about love and acceptance?  I mean, I suppose the pope probably knows more than Charlie Brown and Dave Matthews…  but really?… it’s fucking super out of sync in my mind.  I’m trying to make a list of the values that Belmont University’s Catholic education must hold…  but given this story, I’m really at a loss.

Anyway…  ’tis the season I guess.

When I read a story like Lisa’s… I feel like Charlie Brown – is there no meaning to Christmas anymore?  But then I try and remember that each child is a gift to the world – and Lisa’s child too.  And every baby born changes the world in some fashion… And the more children born who are taught the values of acceptance and love, the more Charlie Brown’s spirit of Christmas will spread – and slowly, I truly believe, the hatred and fear will be smothered.

So I guess, when it comes to Christmas… I’m all about the message of Charlie Brown and Dave Matthews – and I’m not sure they aren’t a bit ahead of the Catholic Church here, even if they are commercial creations…

Merry Christmas Lisa….  all of my best wishes and love on the coming birth of your child… I know love.  And, though it might not seem that way now, when that baby is born, you will realize it is all around.

September 16, 2010

I Want a Fast Car

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, exercise, gay marriage, Marriage, music, Sexuality — saracallow @ 8:25 pm

I’ve had several people ask me why I haven’t written on Judge Walker’s decision reversing Prop 8 in California.  Having been such a vocal opponent of Prop 8, and having written so personally about it here, it only seemed logical to my few remaining followers (since I now blog so infrequently!) that I would at least treat them to a celebratory entry.

I’ve been struggling with this, wanting to write, but having trouble putting words to my feelings.  Am I happy?  Of course.  I’m happy.  I keep telling myself that, and waiting for the elation to follow.  Yet somehow, I just feel deflated.  And so, I’ve struggled with what to say…. what to write here.

In a seemingly unrelated place today, I think I’ve found a bit of insight.

My earliest blog fans seemed to enjoy my essay on running and my use of music for inspiration.  I have actually avoided the subject of exercise in my blog for some time now as well –  because having finished the Couch to 5K program more than a year and a half ago, I basically fell off the exercise bandwagon completely.  This has been somewhat of a source of depression, because I want to be a person who exercises, but somehow, I continually make excuses instead of incorporating it into my life.

I became recently acquainted with a unique exercise regimen that I have decided to take on.  I suppose it can be customized to any person’s ability, but the idea for me is that I must run at least 1 mile a day for 100 days.  The concept being that by just making a small commitment to exercise in your day, every day, it will become habitual – you will learn the consistency of exercise, and perhaps even slowly increase your distance, though that’s not a requirement.  I decided almost immediately that this was the challenge for me….  100 days gets me 1/3 of the way through the year, exercising every day.  That will truly be a huge first for me.  And since right now I am capable of running a mile in about 11 minutes, it is a really small commitment of time….  There’s almost no way you can excuse yourself from 11 minutes of exercise a day…. especially when you have an elliptical sitting unused in your garage just waiting for you to try the “rainy day” excuse.  And I’m turning 35 this year, so this is going to be my present to myself….I am going to become consistent in caring for me.

As I’ve written before, the key for me with exercise is music….so I have already started reestablishing my running mix.  No Akon this time  — I’ve been enjoying a little Train, Vampire Weekend, Hellogoodbye, and Phoenix  (and I’m hiding the fact that there’s some Taylor Swift, Lady Gaga and Katy Perry in the mix too….I know, I’m practically a 15 year old girl with my music tastes, it is a bit embarrassing.)

Today, as I turned on my ipod while making dinner, and old favorite began to play….Tracy Chapman, Fast Car.  Is there anything much more hypnotizing than her voice?  I immediately thought of my running mix, and realized that there is just no way that Fast Car fits, no matter how much I love it…. it’s just too slow.

And here is where it comes, the connection – Judge Walker, Prop 8, 100 days, running and Tracy Chapman, (if I can make it for you….)

Sometimes, the slow path is what you have…. and because it’s what you have, it’s the best.  Which doesn’t mean that you can’t imagine a better way, it just means that you can’t have it.  I don’t really want to run 100 days in a row….I want to do a 10K tomorrow, I want to be a person who sticks with exercise easily.  But I’m not.  I have the 100 day plan, because that is what will bring success for me (I hope).

Judge Walker’s decision is what we have.  It’s the best that we could get.  But I can imagine something different.  I can imagine a world where Prop 8 never passed, where committed GLBT couples can have an expectation of acceptance….Where Judge Walker’s decision flipped a monumental switch and everything changed, and equality existed.  But it didn’t….it’s a long haul still.  The decision is on hold and the Supreme Court is probably going to weigh in.

And every day, people are falling in love, committing to each other, and having babies….and worrying about acceptance and whether or not the law will protect them.

I hear Tracy Chapman, and I want it to work….I want to fly away from this world to the one where this isn’t an issue for debate.  I want to do a 10K tomorrow, and I want Tracy to be part of the mix.  But instead, I have the 100 day challenge….the slow and steady path – 1 mile at a time.  And the truth is, Tracy doesn’t fit.  Eventually I’ll get to 100 miles and that will be quite a distance to have come.  And I know that eventually, equality will come too, and it will have come from much further than 100 miles.  And so Judge Walker’s decision is the best, because that is what we have…and I’m happy, really, I am.   And also, I’m sad.  Because I want a fast car….

February 20, 2009

Thanks to Dear Abby

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, Family, gay marriage, Homosexuality, Law, Marriage, Religion — saracallow @ 3:52 pm

I almost hate to admit it, but the truth is, I’ve probably read more words in Dear Abby columns than in all other written sources combined.  Well, maybe that’s an exaggeration when you consider the length of the average Dear Abby column.  And yet, up until my move to Northern California a year ago, where I’ve chosen to receive a newspaper that doesn’t carry the column, I’d been a devoted Dear Abby reader since about 8 years of age.  It was my favorite morning activity as a child, getting MY part of the newspaper.  I would eagerly seek out Abby and Ann Landers every morning as my parents enjoyed their coffee and the front page.  Through the letters and advice I became acquainted with the marriage concerns, budget woes, child rearing issues, neighborly complaints, etiquette dos and don’ts and pet peeves of the average American.  I also became well acquainted with the generally common sense approach to problems that both authors advocated. 

I even remember my great disappointment when somewhere during my later elementary school years one of two famous sisters came to speak in our small Montana town, and I didn’t get to go.  They were, in my mind, the people with the best answers to everything. 

A friend pointed out the Dear Abby column from today (2/20) to me and I was happy to read its support of my views of the church/state separation in regards to marriage equality.  It is heartening to think that across the country, 8 year olds like me are being exposed to a common sense dialogue on this issue. 

I don’t think I’ve even done an update on our approach to marriage since the passage of Prop. 8, so here it is…

After careful contemplation and research following the passage of Proposition 8, my husband and I elected not to officially divorce.  Truthfully, it would have been our preference to end our participation in civil marriage while it remains a discriminatory institution, and I applaud anyone who has chosen such a course.  However, in our tight financial situation, with Domestic Partnerships open only to same gendered couples, we didn’t find ourselves able to protect our family and children adequately without the benefits conveyed by legal marriage.  (As Doctor Laura would probably HATE to hear me say, I am my children’s mother!)However, while it may be a small protest, we have stopped wearing our wedding rings.  We decided that at the least, we would not continue to publicly designate ourselves as “married”.  We would not wear a symbol of the discriminatory institution that is readily seen and acknowledged as a statement of participation in the exclusionary institution.  And we will continue to do our part to spread the message that church marriage and civil marriage should be separate institutions.  Anything less chooses one religious viewpoint over another, and leaves little protection of religious freedom for ALL of us.  

Thanks Dear Abby.

November 7, 2008

Going on a get-away

I’ll be gone, with my family, for the long weekend to celebrate a family occasion.  My husband’s sister is getting old (which of course says nothing about us) and she’ll need our help to blow out all the candles! 

So I doubt I’ll post here for a few days… but I wanted to leave you with a link that is memorable, and along the lines of my last post – a source of inspiration.

Judith Warner’s column this morning for the NY Times brought tears to my eyes.

If for some reason the hyper link doesn’t take you there (I have a subscription, so it might not be fully available through the link) my guess is that if you search for Judith Warner, Domestic Disturbances, Tears to Remember you can find the text somewhere out there.  It is worth a read.

Have a great weekend. 

I’m committing to coming back to blog with something a little lighter and less political.  Maybe a weekend with three families in one house will provide that inspiration.  I’ll just have to recover enough sleep to write it.  :)

November 5, 2008

Give Birth Again to the Dream

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, gay marriage, Homosexuality, Marriage, Uncategorized — saracallow @ 9:10 pm

Lift up your faces, you have a piercing need
For this bright morning dawning for you.

History, despite its wrenching pain,
Cannot be unlived, and if faced
With courage, need not be lived again.

Lift up your eyes upon
The day breaking for you.

Give birth again
To the dream.

– From Maya Angelou’s “On the Pulse of Morning” – Inaugural Poem at Clinton’s inauguration, 20 January, 1993.

Yesterday, as millions of Americans stood in line to cast their vote – the dream was born anew.  Votes, cast one by one, and the long lines preceding them, were a testament of rebirth.

Yesterday night, as I watched the later Senate races and state ballot initiatives come in, I heard tales of car horns honking, and hands reaching out to give high fives to the strangers passing in the darkened streets of Washington D.C.  This morning, my facebook newsfeed erupted with virtual cheers for the United States – my computer screen bursting with the pride of my friends scattered across the nation – from coast to coast, from sea to newly shining sea.  Today, as I drove my children home from school, I saw helium balloons and flowers attached to Obama campaign signs still adorning front lawns. 

The evidence of enthusiasm was reported on every news station, in every newspaper. 

Barack Obama is the living embodiment of Martin Luther King, Jr’s dream from 1963.  And while no one would suggest that the ugly clouds of racism have completely cleared… it is obvious that the sun shines through brighter today than ever before in our history.

And yet this morning, as I contemplated the results of the election – I was unable to hold the sweet breath of victory in my lungs.  I tasted instead the bitterness of Proposition 8′s passage in California.  I have struggled with what to write here all day long about this example of bigotry and discrimination…  

Should I pridefully proclaim that I struggle to keep faith with God?  Should today be the day where I happily turn my back on faith - and the prejudice and bigotry a few of its members have promulgated in my state? 

Should I denounce my marriage, sue my state, and allow the cynicism I feel towards my fellow man to go unchecked… raging through my blood and overtaking my rational thought?  Should I give each car I pass with a “Yes on 8″ sticker a gesture that clearly conveys my feelings?  (Believe me, it was a struggle not to this morning).

These thoughts and feelings are what sucked that sweet breath of victory from my system this morning.  Which is why I didn’t write.  Instead, I read.  I read Maya Angelou and Abraham Lincoln.  And I read and read and read again, Martin Luther King, Jr. 

Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for freedom by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred.

And I began to breath in.  Because the dream is what Obama is all about.  Inspiration, passion, record participation, joyous celebration, the swelling of pride in America is our gift today.  And tomorrow.  And the day after.  If we can take even a small portion of what we feel right now as a nation forward with us, we will be a better nation.  That hope is what Obama offers us.

Martin Luther King, Jr. traveled down a road of faith to give his exalted speech in 1963.  The America of King’s time offered him plenty  more reason for bitterness than we see today.  And yet, instead, he had a dream.  He inspired thousands of people to share it.  And today millions more celebrate it.

So I will take my cue from him.  I will not drink from the cup of bitterness.  I will not lose faith.  Not today, not in this  America where there is now so much evidence to the contrary.  I will look upon today  as the catalyst for tomorrow.  As the beginning.  Which is what giving birth is anyway… simply a start, but also a miraculous beginning.

I will give birth again to the dream.  Thank you Barack Obama.  Thank you Maya Angelou.  Thank you Martin Luther King, Jr.  Yes we can.  Yes we did.  And Yes,  we will.

October 29, 2008

Hope is on the Menu Today

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, Family, gay marriage, Homosexuality, Law, politics, Presidency — saracallow @ 4:21 pm

Okay, I’m afraid I’ll never have the inspiration to write something like my last post again.  It has generated far more traffic to this blog than anything I’ve written before.  I also posted it on my profile at Blogher, and got as many comments there as I did here.  YEAH!  I feel like my personal message has reached a lot of people in the last few days.  And all by itself, that gives me hope.

Also, I’ve been reading some really great posts out there in the blogosphere which remind me that even with Halloween around the corner, times are not as scary as I sometimes think.

Two posts I found really inspirational:

The Three Ashleys by Nate Silver over at FiveThirtyEight.com

Hate’s Last Stand by Mark Morford at the SF Chronicle and SF Gate

They are both positively uplifting.  When Obama is elected on Tuesday, and Proposition 8 is defeated… something quite remarkable will have come to pass (as Morford tells us) and it all started with people like Ashley (as Silver reminds us).

Have a good night.

October 26, 2008

Proposition 8: This Time, It’s Personal

50 some odd years ago, a young man was coming of age in his conservative Christian family in a small town in Colorado.  They probably didn’t seem conservative actually in that small town, as regular church attendance and an attitude of general adherence to biblical doctrine were relatively common – both for the time period and location.  In fact, the church was the community, it defined the family.  Covered dish dinners and weekend picnics with other church families were probably the norm. 

By all accounts, life in the family was generally happy.  The parents had a solid and loving relationship – one that would be counted as unusually good by close friends and family who remembered the couple lovingly at silver and golden anniversaries before mourning the loss of the patriarch.  The family was comfortable economically, partly attributable to a careful budget and the rest to hard work and luck.  The two boys, four years apart, while not exceptionally close, were amicably friendly. 

Of course, the oldest son, as he entered his adolescence was expected to find the general bumps in the road experienced by all adolescents….  an awkwardly developing body, the intermittent worry of feeling left out and trying to fit in.  But somehow, for this young boy, it was even more difficult.  A constant feeling of not belonging road his coattails wherever he went, and the years passed by with more awkward moments than most that age experience.

Dating for this young man was never easy.  There wasn’t the glib and happy feeling of “first love” – or a sense that he couldn’t stop thinking about a coveted young girl.  It was all nerves – the feeling of having a blindfold over the eyes as one tries to navigate an unknown country…  not speaking the language, or knowing the customs, and finding only failure, running into the brick wall at every turn.

Nonetheless, the young man persisted along, leaving his small town and pursuing an education, and eventually earning two masters degrees.  Finally, meeting a woman with whom he felt comfortable, beginning a family with his own daughter and son. 

As happens for all young people becoming adults, the man expanded his realm of experience.  He traveled, visited with others, questioned the beliefs he’d been raised with, coming back to many of them, but along the way developed his own sense for who he was.  Within this time of discovery came the slow awakening of an always known, but never recognized, truth.  The man was gay.

Together with his wife, he faced the truth.  The pain experienced by both is generally unaccounted for… left buried somewhere, and maybe for good reason.  Yet together they made a decision to move forward, spending the next 15 years much as they had spent the previous several – as good friends, as husband and wife, father and mother…  raising the two children in the family each had envisioned, but without the traditional marital relationship.  They didn’t divorce, only acquired twin beds.  They shared a room, many glasses of wine and good discussions, parented equally and carefully – putting their children ahead of what must have been their personal sadness and sense of loss. 

The son and daughter of this man grew to be teenagers before they ever had an inkling that their family was “different” from other families.  In fact, the peace and calm within the house, the even-keeled parenting, and the obvious friendship between mother and father taught them that maybe their family was better. 

The “difference” finally came to light, towards the end of the children’s own adolescence.  As all children do, they traveled, questioned, and eventually accepted their family – coming back to the idea that it had been a happy place to grow.  The man and his wife, successful in the raising of daughter and son, eventually divorced, allowing each to search for their own romantic happiness, but remained close friends.  The son and daughter succeeded in school and their respective careers, began families of their own, contributed to society in their unique ways.  The man retired, and found joy in living near his grandchildren, contributing his love, time, and attention to the now young and growing family in immeasurable ways.

Proposition 8.  This is my final appeal as the vote draws near, and this time, it’s personal.   

I am the daughter of that gay man, this is the story of my father, the loving “Bapa” to my children, and one of my closest friends.

My dad wasn’t the traditional dad in many ways.  He never enjoyed sports, never tossed the football with my brother – didn’t throw down a beer out by the BBQ with his buddies.  I actually laugh when I try and picture that.  But he was a father in every way that matters.  He loved us unconditionally, he put our needs ahead of his own, he advised us, counseled us, listened to our problems, shared his wisdom, encouraged us and trusted in us as he set us free to become adults.  When we first learned about our different family, he stood back and gave us space to figure it out – while always being available to discuss our questions.

The fear-mongering tactics of the Yes on Proposition 8 campaign turn my stomach. 

Proponents of Proposition 8 tell us that children will be taught about homosexual marriages in school.  This is absolutely false.  California has NEVER dictated teaching on marriage, AND has some of the strongest disclosure and opt-out laws for parents regarding any sexual education their children receive in school. 

Proposition 8 proponents try and claim that theirs is not a campaign against homosexuals, only in favor of traditional marriage and family.  Fine.  But to me, and many like me, raised in a “non-traditional family” (whatever its outside appearances) – this is a bigoted attempt at exclusion.  To claim that a dedicated gay couple is incapable of creating the foundation of family provided to me by my parents, simply because they are the same gender is obviously ridiculous and I take it personally.  Proposition 8 is an attack on my family, on gay couples, on civil rights, and honestly – on ANYONE who values the opportunity to practice their religious freedom in the United States.  When I think about my dad as a young man struggling to find his way in a culture that didn’t include him, when I think about his dedication to our family, his sacrifices, I don’t need a study to tell me; there are no choices here.

Family is what you make it.  There are millions of unhappy heterosexual couples raising children in environments where frying pans fly across the kitchen at one another.  There are parents who undermine each others attempts at discipline, who never discussed their value systems before bearing children, only to find afterwards that they are completely different.   

When my father grew up, in that small town, Christian environment in Colorado, his world view didn’t include gay people.  He tried so hard to make his life fit the “traditional” model - and it just didn’t work.  We cannot continue to refuse to accept and welcome our gay brothers and sisters into  the family.  We should not refuse to allow them to build a traditional family of their own, with two parents and children, joined together in marriage.  By excluding and discriminating against these couples, these families, we are creating further division in society.  We are telling them they don’t exist, not on an equal plane with the rest of society.  We are elevating one form above the other, saying “your person, the way that you are, is not equal to mine”.  We sow the seeds of self-hatred and doubt that many of them struggle with.  This is about civil rights and equality of man.  Proposition 8 is a form of separate but equal, and if we know anything about history, we should know that is inherently discriminatory.

And if it is about God, it should be about acceptance.  Whose God teaches discrimination?  Whose God asks those here on Earth to judge?  And if you value your ability to practice your religion, whatever it’s particular belief system, you should also value the First Amendment.   A particular brand of Christianity may not always be the dominant force in society, but as long as the United States is here, so will be the First Amendment.  The second that we allow a religious determination of our laws, we have undermined its value, and its protection for all. 

My father will be here, in my home, in a short time.  My children call him “Bapa” after my oldest’s earliest attempts at “Grandpa” failed.  Whatever happens with Proposition 8, my husband and I will raise our children to respect gay couples and gay families, to respect their grandfather and treat any partner of his as a grandparent.  They will grow to know that what matters most in the building of your family is not the gender of the person that you partner with, but the partnership itself.   It is the dedication of the relationship, the solid foundation of love and friendship, and the thoughtful approach to parenting that help to ensure success.  These are the elements that will help you raise children who value their family, who will stand up to protect it from those that try and tear it down. 

Those like the proponents of Proposition 8.  Proposition 8 doesn’t protect families, dedicated parents do.  Proposition 8 only succeeds in spreading hate and fear – and tries to claim that people like my dad – and children like me -  don’t belong, that our family doesn’t count.  I can tell you quite simply, that isn’t true.  The laws of our country should respect all families – those like mine, and those just a little bit different… Those where the parents have a romantic relationship, based on a greater self-understanding than my father initially had.  Those where the couple commits to each other, and works at raising children in a peaceful and productive environment, regardless of the obstacles in the way.  My family might have fit the “traditional” picture, while many gay couples build families that have a more “traditional” love.  Either way, what matters most is the commitment to the family, the dedication to the relationship and to the children.  That’s what I learned in my family, and it’s a pretty good lesson for children…. even if they won’t teach it in school.

Every time I see a “Yes on Proposition 8 – Protect Our Families” sign I feel it.  The ignorance, the discrimination, the fear.  This time, it’s about me, my family, my dad – and so many others like him.  And so I write here, and this time, it’s personal, and now you know why. 

Vote NO on PROPOSITION 8.  EQUALITY FOR ALL – for my family, for my dad.

(And if you’re wondering- Yes.  My mother deserves an entire other column… but we’ll save that for another time.)

October 10, 2008

10 Years and Crumbling

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, Family, gay marriage, Homosexuality, Law, Marriage, politics, Sexuality — saracallow @ 2:44 pm

My husband and I celebrated 10 years of marriage this week in Napa, California.  In between glasses of wine and amazing food, I found myself focusing on the institution of marriage, in California specifically, and I am sorry to say – the news is not all good.

California, post the legalization of gay marriage, is an example of disaster.  Since gay couples have been legally allowed to wed in California (an estimated 11,000 have taken advantage of the legalization), heterosexual marriage has suffered inestimable damage.

Yes, it’s true.  You can see it everywhere….  fewer people holding hands, more public fighting, children in tears in public…  the evidence of the destruction of traditional marriage is permeating all aspects of society.

When your gay neighbors wed, you go to bed at night – feeling the inferiority of your status as a heterosexual union – and many Californian’s are walking examples of insecurity about their marriage status.

What???

Okay, I exagerate, I’ll admit it.  But I don’t know what to say… despite all the dire warnings, I haven’t really noticed any difference.  I don’t feel differently about my marriage or my spouse.  I don’t look at the gay couples I see holding hands any differently than I did before.  The fear is ridiculous.  How is my commitment degraded by that of another dedicated couple?

And as we celebrate 10 years of marriage this week…  we raise our glasses to another 10…  and to the equality of our gay neighbors, that they may celebrate with us, their own union, in another decade. 

Equality for all.  No on Proposition 8.

September 10, 2008

Separate States: Religion and Politics

Filed under: California, Civil Rights, gay marriage, Homosexuality, Law, Marriage, politics, Sexuality — saracallow @ 3:33 pm

The entire gay marriage thing has really gotten me thinking about the intersection of religion and politics.  I can’t quite come up with a legitimate reason for discriminating against homosexuals in the institution of marriage that is not religiously based, and I have come to believe that all arguments, even those masquerading as secular are actually faith based.  Commonly made arguments that attempt to avoid religious bases in their “defense” of marriage include those surrounding tradition, procreation, and the government interest in protecting traditional families for economic reasons.  None of this really seems to make sense to me, and all seem a façade for what is actually a religiously based argument. 

Tradition?  The people of the United States have been changing tradition since the beginning of our nation.  It used to be “tradition” to consider people of races other than white as inferior…. But that was obviously not a reason to continue.  Most people would say that the traditional way of disciplining your children with a strong belt has long gone out of style – and for the better.  In the Wild West, there was something involving taking a number of agreed upon paces in the opposite direction of your opponent before turning to fire your gun (or at least that’s what Hollywood would have us believe).  Tradition hardly seems to hold much water in the face of progressive change. 

Procreation is the next common argument…  but the last I checked, there hasn’t been anyone out there suggesting that there should be some sort of fertility pre-screening in order to qualify for marriage.  In fact, I would think there would be great uproar at the idea that there should be a contractual agreement made at the time of application that the couple will provide the state with a child within a specified number of years, else the marriage be voided by lack of offspring.  Look out childless couples, the gay marriage issue may yet put your union in jeopardy.

On to economics.  It seems to me there is a great economic interest for the state in locking people into obligatory care relationships.  Fewer single parents, and a larger number of people with another potential provider in cases of injury / illness would clearly benefit the state economically….  And I can’t see how including same-gender couples in this arrangement wouldn’t be for the benefit of all taxpayers.  Many children are being adopted by gay individuals (hooray! – what a better place than our foster care system!) – and in the view of the state, those children clearly benefit by having two adults with some economic earning power to support them…  not to mention the benefits of having two adults to raise screaming toddlers or sex-crazed teenagers…  Hoping at least one head will remain clear in each distressing moment and upping the chances of raising a strong individual who will not need the state’s support in their own lives.

There are many faith based reasons for discrimination, though I doubt that’s the way many of the pious would like to have it said.  Religion by its nature is a discriminatory institution.  Many faiths have a dogma that should be adhered to if its followers are to participate fully in the benefits of the institution.  It really isn’t open to everyone – though if you’re willing to consider believing, most will do their best to convince you.  Nonetheless, only members of the Latter Day Saints crowd can attend a temple wedding.  Catholic.com lists five different requirements for receiving communion.  I don’t think anyone is arguing religions can’t discriminate.  If a religion decides that God has deemed to bless only heterosexual unions, well – that is their right, whether or not we disagree.  Maybe they even want to work on a new marketing campaign – don’t just be married, be joined by God.

The phrase, “separation of church and state” is attributed to Thomas Jefferson, in a letter he wrote to the Danbury Baptists.  In his letter, he explains that man “owes account to none other for his faith or his worship” and that “the legitimate powers of government reach actions only”.   Thomas Jefferson and the founding fathers owe some credit to John Locke, who believed that man alone could govern his own conscience which naturally exists in a state of liberty.  Upon this foundation was born our freedom of religion, and the separate states of government and personal religious belief.

Here is where some insert the…. “one nation under God” baloney – in the name of tradition no less.  Well, “One nation under God” is proof that tradition can change.  I have heard this phrase used by a radio personality (who probably was better informed but looking for rile up the audience for ratings) to justify the founding of the United States as an essentially Christian nation.  However, it was actually inserted into the pledge of allegiance in 1954 long after it was first written in 1892, and widely adopted by school children in the 1920s.  Incidentally, also during the 50′s “religious-revival” the words “In God We Trust” were added to paper money and replaced our un-official motto, “E Pluribus Unum,” or Out of Many, One.

Well, maybe then I’m wrong, and I’m actually casting a vote in favor of tradition – the tradition of our founding (not the Wild West).  Out of many voices, opinions, religious beliefs, family structures, and yes – that includes gay couples – One nation.  Freedom of your consciousness… judgment by your creator – not your fellow citizen.  Separate states – religion and politics.  Stop the masquerade.

Family Ties

Filed under: California, Family, gay marriage, Law, Marriage — saracallow @ 2:13 pm

I have just returned from a long vacation visiting with family.  During this time, it came to my attention that I am a great aunt.  How, you might wonder, could I have only just realized this?  Well, suffice it to say that the modern family can be complicated.  While I had considered my great nephew a member of my family from the time he entered it, I hadn’t fully processed the knotty branches of the family tree.  And so, as it turns out, at a relatively young age, I am a great aunt – and have actually been one for the last three years or so! 

Coming to this realization caused my eyes to well with tears, which reappear when I recall the specific moment.  They are a reflection of heartfelt gratitude at being attributed a title of importance in a family so complex.  They recognize, and fall to the ground weighted with, the full understanding of the love and inclusion the title conveys.

Family is an important foundation of our culture.  As evidenced by the rush to clarify the definition of marriage in California, the specific nature of family is important to a large portion of our population.  Having been born into a large and closely knit family from the sparsely populated state of Montana, I appreciate the significance of family relationships in our lives.  In fact, if you visit Montana, and conduct an in-depth interview with virtually any citizen there, it will almost always turn out they are acquainted with some member of my family.  I could guess that a statistician could look at the sheer numbers of my family and the meager population of the state and tell you that mathematically, it is quite probable nearly everyone in Montana knows my family. 

Each year members of this large family gather for a reunion/golf tournament.  As I become better acquainted with cousins I grew up with, and extended family members I didn’t even know existed, I am nearly awestruck at the idea that all of these people are a part of the same whole to which I belong. 

In fact, this year our family proved to be a particular benefit, as the group I traveled with had to leave behind a disabled car at the reunion location.  Given the nature of the vast state of Montana, and the more remote location of the reunion, retrieval of the car should have been a clear logistical problem.  Yet in a large family, it was not.  One cousin lent a car for our return trip home, and a different one drove through and picked up the newly repaired car for return to us.  This is not the first time the large family has benefited us.  In fact, it’s not even the first car retrieval we owe to a family member. 

Our families are very treasured, and maybe it is our desire to protect this valuable asset which leads us to try and restrict the definition of family.  Whether it’s the exclusion of gays from the institution of marriage, or the in-law being treated as an outsider, it seems it is almost part of our nature to cling to our family as an exclusive club, to which no new members are welcome.

Given the extent of my family, you might think I would ascribe to this mentality.  (When you consider that I don’t even know the names of half the people I’m related to, it seems clear I don’t need any more relations.)    Yet, when you truly belong to and have benefited as a member of this vast network of ties, you come to realize that “the more the merrier” doesn’t equal a crowd, but a caring community.  As my husband and I raise our children, we have even expanded our “community” by including long term friends as extra Aunts and Uncles, and we take comfort in knowing that the circle of people who will watch out for our children is larger than those related to us by blood.

And yet, philosophically, I’m all for eliminating the restrictive concept of family altogether.  Does blood really make a difference?  What about marriage?  In some way, each definition of family, while broader than the one before, still serves as a restriction – a border letting us know for whom we will go the extra mile, and who is still on the outside.  Wouldn’t it actually be better if we looked at every member of society as our family member?  What would that do for differences of race, creed, class and sexuality?  What if we were equally responsible for the homeless man downtown, or the immigrant child, as we are for the beloved grandparent?

I can imagine some readers cringing at the thought of accepting certain people as members of their family.  Yet, being a member of a family does not have to equal approval.  There are members of my family who take actions on a daily basis that I disapprove of, who vote for things I cannot stomach.  All the same, should one of these family members need their car retrieved within a semi-reasonable distance of my town, I would be happy to assist.  What if we each felt the same responsibility to every member of humanity?  While I wouldn’t want to minimize what are legitimate differences of opinion as to what works best for society, I have to think there would be a little more compassion injected into the debate on nationalized healthcare, spending on education, immigration, and the minimum wage.   

So, when I think of my aforementioned, newly named relation – I can tell you, he’s related to me by virtue of two different marriages, so he’s decidedly not my blood.  Yet he’s my great-nephew, and that’s pretty spectacular.  It’s enough to bring tears to my eyes.  And you know what?  As much as I love it, I think I’d give up the title for an entirely new definition of family…  no titles necessary, everyone welcome. 

Think of all the places I could leave my car.

Theme: WordPress Classic. Blog at WordPress.com. Fonts on this blog.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.