Monday, October 27, 2008
PROP 8 DEBATE
Wow, the Prop 8 debate is sure heating up as the election quickly approaches in just one week's time! In addition, lots of people are upset over the donations of large amounts of money from large corporations and groups like the California Teachers Association, Apple, and Google (just to name a few) to the No on 8 campaign. I can see why they're upset because those who support the ban on same-sex marriages had no say in where their money was going.
No matter how you feel about same-sex marriages, I found these topics interesting:
(1) 61% of California voters already voted to keep marriage between one man and one woman back in 2000. And yet somehow, four judges overturned these votes and they legalized same-sex marriages. Why should any four people be able to change what 61% of the state already voted for?
(2) Prop 8 actually does not take away any rights or benefits that domestic partners currently have.
(3) Although a No vote on Prop 8 does not directly affect what gets taught in schools, it's still going to work its way into lesson plans and assignments. A few years back in Massachusetts, for example, a 5 year old boy brought home a book depicting a same-sex couple raising children. http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/04/29/arrested_father_had_point_to_make/ Though never required to be taught, the idea and demonstration of same-sex marriage is going to work its way into schools and expose kids to issues that parents may not want their kids to be exposed to at that age. In this case, the parents wanted to discuss this with their son themselves when he was a little older. Check out the story.
Wow, the Prop 8 debate is sure heating up as the election quickly approaches in just one week's time! In addition, lots of people are upset over the donations of large amounts of money from large corporations and groups like the California Teachers Association, Apple, and Google (just to name a few) to the No on 8 campaign. I can see why they're upset because those who support the ban on same-sex marriages had no say in where their money was going.
No matter how you feel about same-sex marriages, I found these topics interesting:
(1) 61% of California voters already voted to keep marriage between one man and one woman back in 2000. And yet somehow, four judges overturned these votes and they legalized same-sex marriages. Why should any four people be able to change what 61% of the state already voted for?
(2) Prop 8 actually does not take away any rights or benefits that domestic partners currently have.
(3) Although a No vote on Prop 8 does not directly affect what gets taught in schools, it's still going to work its way into lesson plans and assignments. A few years back in Massachusetts, for example, a 5 year old boy brought home a book depicting a same-sex couple raising children. http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2005/04/29/arrested_father_had_point_to_make/ Though never required to be taught, the idea and demonstration of same-sex marriage is going to work its way into schools and expose kids to issues that parents may not want their kids to be exposed to at that age. In this case, the parents wanted to discuss this with their son themselves when he was a little older. Check out the story.
Comments:
<< Home
1. for the Yes on 8 campaign to use the rhetoric of "liberal judges overturning the will of the people" is a little ridiculous. it is the primary function of the judiciary branch to evaluate and overturn laws that are unconstitutional. i don't have the statistics, but you can imagine what percentage of the old South voted to withhold rights from African Americans, and if it weren't for sound and brave judges (who no doubt faced extreme and violent opposition), many forms of discrimination would still exist today based on race, gender, disability, etc.
most voters have no idea what the judges' ideologies/voting history are - i know for a fact that i don't. i have no idea whether they were voting along party/ideological lines or strictly voted after applying constitutional law doctrines. regardless, marbury v. madison is arguably the first opinion any jr. high/HS student encounters, establishing the long-standing principle of judicial review, rightfully within the CA Supreme Court's job description.
2. while it may not literally take away a right, Prop 8 withholds the right of a homosexual individual to enter a marriage recognized by the State with one other capable and consenting adult whom he or she loves and wants to spend his or her life with. this is a right that all heterosexuals enjoy and often take for granted.
3. you are correct in realizing this. a Yes on 8 vote likewise will not keep homosexuality out of the classrooms. if the CA Educ. Assoc. has already expressed their views on the issue, you can be sure that students will be learning about tolerance and homosexuality outside of the context of formal sex-ed curriculum (e.g., in English, Social Studies, Government, etc.).
the education argument is pretty fruitless. just because a teacher can't say that homosexual marriage is legal doesn't mean that the teacher won't be able to say that it should be, or that homosexuality is an alternate lifestyle that is equal to the heterosexual lifestyle. it is arguably the right and duty of a teacher to teach students the golden rule and to grow up to be responsible and law-abiding citizens. we all know kids can be pretty cruel, and if you look up the rates of suicide for the LGBT community (and especially for young teenagers who were/are bullied mercilessly), you might find it desirable for children to learn at a young age NOT that homosexuality is good and that the Christian community condones it, but that there are people who are different who still deserve to be treated with equal rights and with mutual respect.
i'll email you my complete thoughts on 8 that aren't addressed in your post so i don't hijack the rest of your comments section. =)
most voters have no idea what the judges' ideologies/voting history are - i know for a fact that i don't. i have no idea whether they were voting along party/ideological lines or strictly voted after applying constitutional law doctrines. regardless, marbury v. madison is arguably the first opinion any jr. high/HS student encounters, establishing the long-standing principle of judicial review, rightfully within the CA Supreme Court's job description.
2. while it may not literally take away a right, Prop 8 withholds the right of a homosexual individual to enter a marriage recognized by the State with one other capable and consenting adult whom he or she loves and wants to spend his or her life with. this is a right that all heterosexuals enjoy and often take for granted.
3. you are correct in realizing this. a Yes on 8 vote likewise will not keep homosexuality out of the classrooms. if the CA Educ. Assoc. has already expressed their views on the issue, you can be sure that students will be learning about tolerance and homosexuality outside of the context of formal sex-ed curriculum (e.g., in English, Social Studies, Government, etc.).
the education argument is pretty fruitless. just because a teacher can't say that homosexual marriage is legal doesn't mean that the teacher won't be able to say that it should be, or that homosexuality is an alternate lifestyle that is equal to the heterosexual lifestyle. it is arguably the right and duty of a teacher to teach students the golden rule and to grow up to be responsible and law-abiding citizens. we all know kids can be pretty cruel, and if you look up the rates of suicide for the LGBT community (and especially for young teenagers who were/are bullied mercilessly), you might find it desirable for children to learn at a young age NOT that homosexuality is good and that the Christian community condones it, but that there are people who are different who still deserve to be treated with equal rights and with mutual respect.
i'll email you my complete thoughts on 8 that aren't addressed in your post so i don't hijack the rest of your comments section. =)
# posted by 
: 11:47 PM
: 11:47 PM
Just to clarify: Marriage is NOT a right (for heterosexuals or for homosexuals, or for bisexuals for that matter). Marriage is a privilege and a gift from God. This is NOT a civil rights issue... it's an issue of morality. And I wish it never got politicized.
Yes, teachers will still say what they want to say, but should they be encouraged to do so by a law that misrepresents traditional family values (maybe values is the wrong word)? When a teacher brings up a controversial issue as normal, he/she is not opening dialogue for a child... he/she is dictating what is right/wrong. Dialogue is not truly open between a more knowledgeable worldly authority figure and a mere child.
Nevertheless, the Christian community really needs to rise up at this time to display Godly love and compassion for people even if they disagree with us. We're not better than they are. They are not better than we are. We were all created by God and everyone should be able to partake in God's love.
Post a Comment
Yes, teachers will still say what they want to say, but should they be encouraged to do so by a law that misrepresents traditional family values (maybe values is the wrong word)? When a teacher brings up a controversial issue as normal, he/she is not opening dialogue for a child... he/she is dictating what is right/wrong. Dialogue is not truly open between a more knowledgeable worldly authority figure and a mere child.
Nevertheless, the Christian community really needs to rise up at this time to display Godly love and compassion for people even if they disagree with us. We're not better than they are. They are not better than we are. We were all created by God and everyone should be able to partake in God's love.
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]