(no subject)
Nov. 9th, 2008 07:33 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
nohanii*sigh* So, he responded to the email. He obviously was not swayed one bit, and he accused me of being "uncivil and judgmental." I admit that I may have been a teeny bit rude, and I definitely scolded him like a child (which, given his maturity level...). He also completely twisted some of the things that I said ("if you wish to be at war" when I definitively said that I didn't) It's just... gah, you should read it:
Catie,
I'm not at war but if the three of you wish to be at war that's your
choice. If you wish to continue to express your disapproval that's your
choice. We all have choices. I will be honest with you and tell you I am
not going to change my mind on how I voted.
Personally this is all my private choice, and I think it's your mom's
too but she needs to speak for herself. I never told Kelly anything
about how I'd vote. She never asked me to vote one way or the other. But
when she asked me how I voted I answered truthfully. No recriminations.
No blame. No anger. Just truthfully.
Given where we are all future answers to anything that may be
controversial will be no comment; whatever I believe or vote is my
private decision and is literally no one else's business.
Is it OK for me to discriminate due to lifestyle? Yes, it is. It's OK
for all of us. If one's lifestyle included doing illegal drugs I can
discriminate. If one's lifestyle leads to alcoholism I can discriminate.
If one's lifestyle means one never has money and may be thrown on the
street, and I've given that person thousands of $$ in the past I can
discriminate by not throwing good money after bad. If one were a porno
actor/actress I can discriminate and give my disapproval. Except for the
illegal drug example everything else I wrote about was legal behavior,
but I don't have to approve of it or vote to support it, etc. We have a
right to not only have our opinions but to voice our opinions, whether
something is about income taxes, presidential candidates or lifestyles.
Given your argument you have no right to criticize anyone who practices
a religion because that religion is part of their lifestyle.
I don't see that I am not living by the Golden Rule. I am not treating
Kelly any different. I knew she was bisexual/gay when we drove the van
to Georgia (when I was unemployed and could have saved the $1000 cash
expense) and gave her a van worth $3500. When we stayed in her
apartment. When she and Geena kissed in front of us. When we gave up our
limited time with you to spend a week to help our daughter. I wasn't
insulted nor did my "stomach turn" by any of that. I treated them, to
their faces, kindly and non-judgmentally. I believe the Golden Rule in
this case means what two consenting adults do in the bedroom is
generally not anyone else's business, assuming there's no abuse or
similar. That's also how I want to be treated.
I'll deal with the particulars of traditional vs gay marriage in another
email since it's late.
I would never have supported miscegenation and presuming I would have is
uninformed at best. Even if I had, the equal protection clause in the
14th (if I recall correctly) amendment would make miscegenation illegal,
so it wouldn't matter what I think. This is something we as a nation
decided and amended the constitution as one means to redress slavery and
race-based discrimination. In that regard Brown v Board of Education was
also correctly decided by the courts - and I agree - because "separate
but equal" is not equal protection of the laws.
I also never said gay marriage would lead to people marrying animals. I
said it could lead to polygamy/polyandry (and, indeed, some have argued
that if gays can marry then why can't a man have multiple wives, after
all they're all consenting adults?) and it could lead to incestuous
marriage between consenting adults (given the genetics involved the
state has a compelling interest to prevent that).
I do accept Kelly's living arrangements. She's living in a lesbian
relationship. I don't condemn it. I haven't interfered with it. I
haven't acted passive-aggressively to undermine anything about it. I
genuinely like Geena. I even gave them time to vacation in our Myrtle
Beach timeshare - I know what's going on and my actions are
non-discriminatory. My behavior is congruent with my acceptance. But
accepting her living situation isn't the same as agreeing she should
have the right to marry Geena.
I was very respectful of Kelly's email to us. I haven't disrespected her
view regarding gay marriage at all and I don't hold her views against
her - we differ in our views, that's all. I do resent her taking a
private email between her and me and forwarding it to you and Nick, and
I resent Nick's one word "Despicable" text message to mom and me and his
follow up text to mom saying he wouldn't talk to her but she could leave
him a voicemail. If you're coming from that position and you
automatically equate us as racists (see your third paragraph) or
equivalent when you know we are not then it is not I who is being
disrespectful. And I truly resent your and Nick's presumption that we
are bad people for voting the way we did. If you want to have a
discussion based on that presumption and showing all the anger you have
then I will not participate in that discussion regardless of how long or
how often you try.
Let me repeat - I respect your view that gay marriage should be legal. I
respect you. I don't agree with your view, but I respect you (until you
accuse me of supporting miscegenation). None of that should cause a war.
It is your and Nick's angry and accusatory reactions to our vote that is
rendering us apart. I chose how I voted. You chose how you reacted. If
you and Nick are going to yell at us in emails and text messages and
accuse us of perfidy then we (or at least I) don't have to participate
in the yelling.
Think about what you're saying - I have to think about how I vote and if
that will impact my children's view of me. Where does that stop? Do I
have to stop and think about how you'll feel before I decide if I'll
vote for or against limits on abortion, or tax increases, or high speed
trains, or universal health care, or proper farming techniques or the
death penalty?
I've been civil about this whole thing, whether it's Prop 8 or Kelly's
lesbian relationship. Read your email and its incivility and
judgmentality. It is that incivility and judgmentalism that I will not
participate in.
Dad
a) Did he seriously compare gay marriage to illegal drugs and porn?
b) I did not accuse him of supporting miscegenation laws, I correlated them to the ban on gay marriage
c) The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. You said it yourself.
d) How is the Brown v. Board of Education decision different from the California Supreme Court decision?
e) Yay! You finally admitted that it's not just a "living arrangment"
f) Did you even read my email? I said that "we love you" and it's your vote that we don't agree with; I never said you were bad people, and my email wasn't angry. I could have given you pissed the fuck off, but I didn't.
g) Soooo everyone has to all follow your stupid conscience, but you don't have to think about how you impact people? If that were true, we would still have the miscegenation laws, and probably still have slavery.
h) You have most definitely not been civil "about this whole thing." You told your eldest daughter that she is not worthy to marry the woman that she loves, and you have told all three of us to stfu. You twised my words and accused me of things that I didn't say. You told Kelly that she was responsible for "ripping the family apart" because she "incited Nick" to be rude to you and to hurt your precious feelings.
i) Grow up and develop a real conscience. You won't even respond to Kelly's email about her health, which has absolutely nothing to do with the current argument.
And Mother? At least say something about this. Avoiding it won't make it go away.
Catie,
I'm not at war but if the three of you wish to be at war that's your
choice. If you wish to continue to express your disapproval that's your
choice. We all have choices. I will be honest with you and tell you I am
not going to change my mind on how I voted.
Personally this is all my private choice, and I think it's your mom's
too but she needs to speak for herself. I never told Kelly anything
about how I'd vote. She never asked me to vote one way or the other. But
when she asked me how I voted I answered truthfully. No recriminations.
No blame. No anger. Just truthfully.
Given where we are all future answers to anything that may be
controversial will be no comment; whatever I believe or vote is my
private decision and is literally no one else's business.
Is it OK for me to discriminate due to lifestyle? Yes, it is. It's OK
for all of us. If one's lifestyle included doing illegal drugs I can
discriminate. If one's lifestyle leads to alcoholism I can discriminate.
If one's lifestyle means one never has money and may be thrown on the
street, and I've given that person thousands of $$ in the past I can
discriminate by not throwing good money after bad. If one were a porno
actor/actress I can discriminate and give my disapproval. Except for the
illegal drug example everything else I wrote about was legal behavior,
but I don't have to approve of it or vote to support it, etc. We have a
right to not only have our opinions but to voice our opinions, whether
something is about income taxes, presidential candidates or lifestyles.
Given your argument you have no right to criticize anyone who practices
a religion because that religion is part of their lifestyle.
I don't see that I am not living by the Golden Rule. I am not treating
Kelly any different. I knew she was bisexual/gay when we drove the van
to Georgia (when I was unemployed and could have saved the $1000 cash
expense) and gave her a van worth $3500. When we stayed in her
apartment. When she and Geena kissed in front of us. When we gave up our
limited time with you to spend a week to help our daughter. I wasn't
insulted nor did my "stomach turn" by any of that. I treated them, to
their faces, kindly and non-judgmentally. I believe the Golden Rule in
this case means what two consenting adults do in the bedroom is
generally not anyone else's business, assuming there's no abuse or
similar. That's also how I want to be treated.
I'll deal with the particulars of traditional vs gay marriage in another
email since it's late.
I would never have supported miscegenation and presuming I would have is
uninformed at best. Even if I had, the equal protection clause in the
14th (if I recall correctly) amendment would make miscegenation illegal,
so it wouldn't matter what I think. This is something we as a nation
decided and amended the constitution as one means to redress slavery and
race-based discrimination. In that regard Brown v Board of Education was
also correctly decided by the courts - and I agree - because "separate
but equal" is not equal protection of the laws.
I also never said gay marriage would lead to people marrying animals. I
said it could lead to polygamy/polyandry (and, indeed, some have argued
that if gays can marry then why can't a man have multiple wives, after
all they're all consenting adults?) and it could lead to incestuous
marriage between consenting adults (given the genetics involved the
state has a compelling interest to prevent that).
I do accept Kelly's living arrangements. She's living in a lesbian
relationship. I don't condemn it. I haven't interfered with it. I
haven't acted passive-aggressively to undermine anything about it. I
genuinely like Geena. I even gave them time to vacation in our Myrtle
Beach timeshare - I know what's going on and my actions are
non-discriminatory. My behavior is congruent with my acceptance. But
accepting her living situation isn't the same as agreeing she should
have the right to marry Geena.
I was very respectful of Kelly's email to us. I haven't disrespected her
view regarding gay marriage at all and I don't hold her views against
her - we differ in our views, that's all. I do resent her taking a
private email between her and me and forwarding it to you and Nick, and
I resent Nick's one word "Despicable" text message to mom and me and his
follow up text to mom saying he wouldn't talk to her but she could leave
him a voicemail. If you're coming from that position and you
automatically equate us as racists (see your third paragraph) or
equivalent when you know we are not then it is not I who is being
disrespectful. And I truly resent your and Nick's presumption that we
are bad people for voting the way we did. If you want to have a
discussion based on that presumption and showing all the anger you have
then I will not participate in that discussion regardless of how long or
how often you try.
Let me repeat - I respect your view that gay marriage should be legal. I
respect you. I don't agree with your view, but I respect you (until you
accuse me of supporting miscegenation). None of that should cause a war.
It is your and Nick's angry and accusatory reactions to our vote that is
rendering us apart. I chose how I voted. You chose how you reacted. If
you and Nick are going to yell at us in emails and text messages and
accuse us of perfidy then we (or at least I) don't have to participate
in the yelling.
Think about what you're saying - I have to think about how I vote and if
that will impact my children's view of me. Where does that stop? Do I
have to stop and think about how you'll feel before I decide if I'll
vote for or against limits on abortion, or tax increases, or high speed
trains, or universal health care, or proper farming techniques or the
death penalty?
I've been civil about this whole thing, whether it's Prop 8 or Kelly's
lesbian relationship. Read your email and its incivility and
judgmentality. It is that incivility and judgmentalism that I will not
participate in.
Dad
a) Did he seriously compare gay marriage to illegal drugs and porn?
b) I did not accuse him of supporting miscegenation laws, I correlated them to the ban on gay marriage
c) The 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. You said it yourself.
d) How is the Brown v. Board of Education decision different from the California Supreme Court decision?
e) Yay! You finally admitted that it's not just a "living arrangment"
f) Did you even read my email? I said that "we love you" and it's your vote that we don't agree with; I never said you were bad people, and my email wasn't angry. I could have given you pissed the fuck off, but I didn't.
g) Soooo everyone has to all follow your stupid conscience, but you don't have to think about how you impact people? If that were true, we would still have the miscegenation laws, and probably still have slavery.
h) You have most definitely not been civil "about this whole thing." You told your eldest daughter that she is not worthy to marry the woman that she loves, and you have told all three of us to stfu. You twised my words and accused me of things that I didn't say. You told Kelly that she was responsible for "ripping the family apart" because she "incited Nick" to be rude to you and to hurt your precious feelings.
i) Grow up and develop a real conscience. You won't even respond to Kelly's email about her health, which has absolutely nothing to do with the current argument.
And Mother? At least say something about this. Avoiding it won't make it go away.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-11-10 09:08 am (UTC)This is just all very frustrating, and I'm not even apart of this! I can only advise that you all agree to take some time off to cool off. It's all very fresh and since everything is being taken as an attack, the wounds will only grow deeper if you continue. I'm not saying you are wrong to try to reason with your parents, it just seems that for now, it's not doing much. I'd advise talking in person but ignoring logistics (I have no clue where everyone is living that is involved), but I'm not sure even that is the best idea, at least now. Ah, I'm no help! I hope you don't think I'm being mean/judgmental/attacking. Eep. And your mom not saying anything yet isn't a good sign. Have you tried contacting her directly? I'm curious as to how she's reacting because in my experience hearing about my friends' families, it's been the mom who would be most likely to take things too seriously and overreact.
The "to their faces" comment bugs me. To me it means he isn't so nice about it when they're gone, which isn't a good sign. Ugh. And sadly, the 14th amendment clause doesn't work here that nicely. The feds have the Defense of Marriage Act from 1996, meaning that only recognize the marriage of a man and woman when it comes to federal benefits (and also saying that no state has to recognize same sex marriages from other states). According to wikipedia, one for California was overturned as unconstitutional, and that decision was what prop 8 was all about. I'm not sure how we're going to win this one, so it's a good thing people smarter and more knowledgeable than me are doing the real fighting.
And, now I'll step off my box/end my little ramble. This is just bad times all around and really, it's too complicated and delicate for me to really help or even pretend to know what you should do. I see where you are coming from and I understand. I'm curious as to what he has to say about "traditional vs. gay marriage" because that's what this is all about. I have a feeling that my grandma is not only against gay marriage but also the relationships that go with them (with the way she's trying to convince me to not get a girlfriend, ever).
please don't hate me...
no subject
Date: 2008-11-11 05:30 am (UTC)I hate the word lifestyle. Being a health nut or a smoker is a lifestyle. Being celibate is a lifestyle. Lifestyle IMPLIES CHOICE. Being gay? NOT a lifestyle. Falling in love with someone of the same gender? NOT a lifestyle.
But accepting her living situation isn't the same as agreeing she should
have the right to marry Geena.
He doesn't seem to understand that yes, it really is. Geena and Kelly want to get married. Saying they shouldn't have that right? IS NOT ACCEPTANCE. It just isn't. He can say he accepts them all he wants. He can continue to talk to them and help them and go on about how he's accepting of them but if he still thinks they should not be afforded the same right to marry that he is afforded, he is not accepting them. Period.
Think about what you're saying - I have to think about how I vote and if
that will impact my children's view of me.
Yes. Yes you do. This isn't arbitrary! This directly affects your daughter's future! It affects her rights as a fucking human being. So yes, you absolutely, no question, have to think about how your vote will impact your children and their views of you, just as they would think about how a vote to restrict your rights would impact you. Why is that difficult to grasp? Why?! I really want to know!
Also, my irony meter regarding the 14th Amendment paragraph is off the charts. Seriously, wow. That...is an impressive level of Just Not Getting It.
This frustrates me so much. If people who have no personal investment in this at all can understand why it's so important, then why can't he? I just...argh.
no subject
Date: 2008-11-11 05:28 pm (UTC)