Posting

One more note: I really do enjoy the written dialogue from this blog so I encourage people to post. This is fun and helpful to everyone also but my motivation is mostly selfish. I am more of a thinker and sometimes I run out of things to think about. I especially love posts from those who think differently than me. I have heard some are intimidated or fearful, but....just don't be. We are all human and realize some of our positions are undoubtedly wrong. The more areas we have opinions on the more likely we are going to be wrong on something.
This is a viewpoint I innately hold and try to encourage. I don't take the adversarial approach to argumentation but think of discussion as two people trying to come the truth together (like Plato). It's hard for me to interact with those who take the other approach - I don't understand the advantage and I am not that way. And it's weird to me that almost everyone takes the adversarial approach - I believe this is a effect of ignorance. I know enough to say I don't know - such confidence encourages the communal approach to discussion but most people don't know this much.

Homosexual Marriage

SoCal had Prop 8 pass last week (~52.5%) that made a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. Here are my reasons for and against gay marriage as state law
Against
1. Homosexuality is immoral. Morality does not determine law but does affect it. As in, we don't allow parents to beat their children not just because it's bad for society but because it's wrong. The trick is determining which moral to legislate.
2. Marriage has always been defined as between a man and woman. This has been always been the definition, so it should be the default. It seems there should be a reason to stray away from the norm.
3. I'd rather live in a moral than immoral society. This stems from homosexuality as wrong, and given a choice I'd rather society encourage morality.
4. It devalues marriage. Allowing a more liberal/inclusive view of marriage cheapens or diminishes the traditional marriage.

For
1. It's not the state's roll to regulate a traditionally church-related institution. The state should take the position of most freedom and allow individuals the freedom to determine marriage as they see fit. Also, since this is such a religious view the state should be very careful about intervening in church affairs. Separation of church and state is good.

Incidentally, I don't see this as a discrimination issue as it is often postulated but a definition of marriage issue. It would be discrimination if we were not allowing gays to practice or allow people to hire based on sexual orientation. Those are already allowed; the issue is what does marriage mean? We have already allowed so much liberty in terms of homosexuality that I feel it is established by the state that homosexuality is ok; this is a little piece at the end of a long line of homosexual liberty.