Yesterday was “Chic-fil-A Appreciation Day,” which became a day of record sales. This day was devised in support of the business after the criticism it received when Dan Cathy publicly made anti-gay comments. If your Facebook feed hasn’t exploded with people talking about Chic-fil-A, you probably live under a rock – and by that I mean you’re lucky.
{ 0 comments }
I voted against NC Amendment One today and here’s the simple logic behind it:
Religious institutions have every right to define anything they want. Few are the laws that restrict religious practices. If a religious institution desires to define marriage as between a man and a woman, that is the right of that institution and there should be no government regulation that prevents said religious institution from forcing members to wed couples that do not fit with the institution’s definition. With that said, not everyone belongs to the same religious institution. Subsets of various religious institutions cannot agree on the littlest things, including the definition of marriage.
The purpose of government is to protect the rights of citizens in an effort to ensure all people have a happy life with equal rights no matter the political or religious background. All citizens of the United States of America should be protected from discriminating laws founded by the belief system of one group. The government must protect the interests of all citizens without causing an interference with the beliefs of one group over another. In the case of marriage, one group believes that marriage should be defined as between a woman and man and feels entitled to ensure the government upholds that notion. On the other hand, another group believes that marriage should be defined as two consenting, of-age individuals.
The First Amendment clearly states that the government shall make no law opposing or favoring a religion. Hence why religious institutions can define and practice whatever they want. A law opposing religion is not the same as a law preventing religion from taking away the rights of another citizen. In the case of Amendment One, if the bill were to pass, it would interfere with the lives of citizens. Those citizens’ actions are of no consequence to those who do not support gay rights. If Amendment One were to pass, it would be supporting a belief system of a religious institution, favoring one religious ideal over other ideals. This bias interferes with the diversity that makes this country great.
As a citizen of the United States you have every right to believe what you want to believe and practice whatever belief system you would like. If you do not believe marriage should be anything but between a man and a woman, join a religious institution that believes in the same thing. Your world will not come crashing down if a homosexual couple is married; leave them alone. If your religious institution does not believe in homosexual marriage, don’t allow your religious institution to wed homosexual couples; they won’t want to be a part of an intolerant community anyway and there are plenty of pro-gay individuals who are licensed to marry. You have my personal guarantee that you will not go to hell if you don’t try to take away the rights of gay people, and if it makes you sleep better at night you can tell yourself God told me directly.
We are on this earth for a finite time. In that lifetime there are people that we love. If I am allowed to love someone of a different sex and receive rights for doing so, what right is it of mine to say that two homosexual individuals cannot receive the same rights? Someone who is homosexual is no better than someone who is heterosexual, just as someone who is heterosexual is no better than someone who is homosexual. We are all humans; act like it. Vote “against” Amendment One so North Carolina tax dollars don’t have to go to funding the court cases that will be required to defend the legislation (which, as it is unconstitutional, will ultimately be shot down in a higher court).
{ 0 comments }
