I'm still here
Well sorta, I'm on the way to Phoenix (got boost).
But I think two questions were posed to me. The first was why I had a problem with calling a union of homosexual partners marriage. Well, I believe that marriage is a vow between a man and a woman before God.
It's simply what I believe and it's ok for others to believe differently.
I think the second question was how do tax and spending policies relate to homosexuality.
Again, I think folks are trying to put me in a box here. I simply said that as long as large sums of money are taken from me in the name of government policy or do make society better, then don't you think it is fair to actually consider what I think would make society better.
After twelve hours of windshield time today (Tulsa, OK to Gallup, NM) I heard a lot of radio. I did get to hear Glenn Beck(sp?) this morning, and he previewed a chapter of his book that said the socialists were right (or something to that effect) that it is good for society to help his or her fellow man.
He went on to state that he and was pretty sure others as well, feel really good about doing volunteer work. He mentioned some of the work he's done and then contrasted that to the feelings people have on April 15th. While large sums of tax money are taken from people, they really don't feel like they or their government is really doing good.
Bringing this back into the topic, I feel the same way about this issue. I feel like the very people who are saying live and let live, only allow this if your POV is progressive.
I also say live and let live, but let communities decide their standards of morals and decency. Let communities decide what they are going to fund as far as social projects. And by all means, get the Federal Government out of this.
I think my argument has been consistent all along, let these issues be decided locally, and if a group wants or needs to further an agenda, let them fund it. This goes for all sides in a debate. If a group wants to promote abstinence in the schools let them fund it. If another group wants to hand out condoms, let them fund it. However, in both cases, it is ultimately up to the parent to decide.
I'm probably too tired to put together a cogent arguement, but let's just say that I feel that public schools and popular culture are trying to teach my children a message that goes counter with the values my wife and I share. And what ticks me off is at least for the schools, I'm paying for them to do this.
Bottom line, as long as I'm a citizen, paying taxes, I have the same right, no more, no less than any other citizen, to petition my government to craft laws and set goals that largely follow my values.
I don't discourage others from doing the same, but by the same token, just because my views may be unpopular, that is no reason for them to not be considered.
Do I expect the entire nation to adopt my values? No But I do believe I have the right to fashion a community based on values that do not discriminate. That's why I've chosen to focus on behavior and not particular "groups" of people. I'm not proposing communities create laws that only apply to a particular group, but instead fashion laws for all members of that community.
Isn't that a big part of what we call self government? Federal fiat doesn't seem much like self government to me.
TB
