?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Voting and the Problems With Liberty - Abadoss' Mind
(=Links=) - Abadoss' Realm - Facebook (my Facebook profile) - Twitter (@Abadoss) - deviantART (my public art) - YouTube (my public videos) - SoundClick (My Public mp3s) - Conceptual Music Competition - OverClocked ReMix - Young Composers - Iona - Rebecca St. James - Jake Shimabukuro - Troy Keyn - Jessica Meshell - Oregon Symphony - All Classical - Warner Pacific College - Arts & Communication Magnet Academy - Thunder Game Works - Real Life Comics - Penny Arcade - Homestar Runner - Hulu - Craigslist - Encyclopedia of Arda - Uileann Obsession - Weapon Masters - Michael Greenholt - Emerald Twilight - Digital Blasphemy
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 12:17 am
Voting and the Problems With Liberty

I just received my ballot today... oh, man the thoughts that run through my head. I have to say that voting is most difficult for the disillusioned. I vote because it is my right and duty as a citizen, but so much means so little. There were only a few that I had definite answers for (President was not one of them). I've managed to fill out all but one measure... Measure 36.

(For those outside Oregon: Measure 36 amends the State Constitution to define marriage as between only one man and one woman, therefore effectively banning marriage between homosexual partners)

Those who know me well enough know that I completely disagree with homosexuality and I don't approve of the lifestyle. That's my opinion and my belief. But when it comes to politics, particularly the limiting of another's freedom because of my own beliefs, it's not that easy for me to come to decision.

I also believe that regardless of the lifestyle, homosexual people are still people. If a homosexual person were to ask me what I thought of their lifestyle, I'd be honest, but it's not my place to dictate how they live (as much as it might beneficial to my beliefs). If that person were to want my opinion that's their choice and so it's not an invasion of their free will.

On the other hand, my beliefs are such that I am required to impact the community that I live in (though I prefer to do it in a subtle and non-invasive manner). And my problem is that I agree with the measure by way of values and it is the definition that I use for marriage. However, our government is not myself or my belief system. I have to care about the welfare of others when I make choices that affect other people.

While it's doubtful that my singular vote is going to be the determining factor in this matter, it still is an issue of personal and societal honor. Do I have the honor within my society to act in full conscienciousness that the person sitting next to me may not believe the same things I do or carry the same values and morals? Where do you draw the line between "right and wrong" and walking on eggshells to allow liberty to someone else? Is that not denying my own liberty? If I don't act according to what I believe is "right and wrong", does that make me untrue to my beliefs?

Then comes another problem. In a society where marriage has become so devalued and dishonored, how would homosexual marriage be any different? Personally, I believe in marriage as a union between one man and one woman in the presence of God. Society has removed God and all that His presence in marriage fulfills. Marriage, in the societal setting, has become empty and, as time has progressed, marriages fall apart with little discrimination. Not only that, but society has removed sex from marriage, so for those that would have married for the sex (not that it's right) don't need marriage anymore for that. Marriage, to someone without God or the sanctity of marriage and all it's comforts, becomes null except for tax benefits and other legal matters. If the State accepts those kinds of marriages, what difference would a homosexual marriage be?

Another issue then becomes that of "love". Love is such a fickle thing. I surely talk enough about it. Is actual true love (not in the Biblical sense) possible between a homosexual couple? For me it's difficult because I personally have yet to experience love. I know what it's like to "be in love", which is entirely different. However, despite how much homosexually goes against what I believe and stand for, I'm convinced that a homosexual person has as much capacity for love as any heterosexual person (although highly misguided, in my opinion). And if "love" is a societal prerequisite for marriage, then I have a problem.

Through logic and belief, I have a strong case to vote either way. It's a paradox. A most insufferable paradox. My only other option is to not vote at all on the matter, but that would be rejecting my duty and waving my right, which is bad as voting for either side and denying the other. Plus, it would be irresponsible.

It's times like these I wish I was ignorant and could vote blissfully in my irrationale. No such luck for me.

Current Mood: pensive pensive
Current Music: "Crystalline" -Kenneth Edward Keyn

9CommentReplyShare

appleboy
appleboy
Scott Schumacher
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 06:25 am (UTC)
Guess I didn't know

Not to attack you, because we all have our own belief system, and we all have to be accountable for our own lives on this rock we call Earth, but, I never took you for being even slightly homophobic.

I wish I had the luxury of ever being able to vote whether heterosexual folks could or could not do something, because I didn't believe in their "lifestyle". I don't think I ever once felt like I didn't "believe in" heterosexuality. It exists. As does my sexuality (in case you didn't know, you have a gay LJ friend here..should you choose to keep me on that list). They've existed since the beginings of time, and God made me this way, and I'm a child of God. I resolved that conflict long ago.


ReplyThread
abadoss
abadoss
Kenneth Edward Keyn
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 10:57 am (UTC)
Re: Guess I didn't know

I'm aware of your orientation and you're not the only one on my friends list who is homosexual. Please know that regardless of what differences exist, I'm still willing to be your friend. It's simply where I stand on that issue. What you do, how you act, and how you live is your character. Who you are is an individual human being. Therefore, I must and will treat you as I would any human being.


ReplyThread Parent
palebythesea
the bride stripped bare by her bachelors, even
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 08:40 am (UTC)

Its good to see that people put much thought into their choices for votes on local issues. I may not agree with all that you're saying, but its good that you are taking it seriously. Though, if you are truly torn 50/50 than I don't think it would be irresponsible to not vote on the issue. I think it would be more irresponsible to force yourself to answer arbitrarily based on your immediate feelings and then maybe regret it later.

Anyways, I'm sure that you can guess what my position on this issue is. Though, as with all issues, I carefully arrived at it through some soul-searching (as you seem to be doing). I tried to make sure that my choice was representing me, and me only. Not my upbringing, not my social environment currently or of past, not what had been taught to me by someone else be it a teacher, a parent, or a clergy, because effectively we may play by similar rules but everyone interprets the game differently through their unique eyes.

I agree and disagree with some of the arguments you've outlined, and you are definitely free to feel conflicted. The only part that I felt compelled to bring up here is when you say "Where do you draw the line between 'right and wrong' and walking on eggshells to allow liberty to someone else?" I feel as though the most detrimental part about this measure is that it effectively draws the line of "right and wrong" for the citizens of Oregon, whether they agree with it or not. Granted, the state/government draws the line in reference to right and wrong in criminal terms, but in this case I don't feel as though it should be a universal black/white decision. (especially because the measure, if failed, doesn't allow gay marriage. It simply doesn't bar it constitutionally.) I also feel as though its taking it to extremes to say that one would be walking on eggshells for someone else's liberty. Because, frankly, it doesn't really effect you. This measure isn't going to seal the floodgates on some horde of gay people who are bent on turning society into a corrupt cesspool. It's just going to limit their bounds as people who have otherwise harmed no one, and I think that gets to the point of why I think this measure deserves to be defeated.


ReplyThread
abadoss
abadoss
Kenneth Edward Keyn
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 11:15 am (UTC)

I think it might help to clarify the way I express my thought process. When I think about an issue such as gay marriage, I don't think in extremes. I think in the very practical (although somewhat ideal). When I write about it, in an attempt to express my thoughts, I use contrast (which is most effective with extremes) in order to convey the dilemma in my mind.

It's also important to note that, while Descartes would disagree with me, you cannot seperate yourself and your opinions from your environment (I mean that as a whole). That's not to say that you are your environment, but it's to say that you would not believe the things that you believe or think the way you think had you not grown up the way you grew up, saw the things you saw, did the things you did, lived the way you lived, etc. In the same breath, if someone else where to live your life exactly, they would not think, feel, do things exactly like you simply because you are you and no one else. Therefore your opinions are shaped by the combination of you and your environment.

I say that because the very act of choosing to not be affected by your upbringing or whatever, is in itself an effect of your upbringing or whatever. That's why it's important to think of such issues in a wholistic manner (which also means seeking out the perceptions and perspectives of of others that may completely opposite from you and considering them).


ReplyThread Parent

abadoss
abadoss
Kenneth Edward Keyn
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 10:50 am (UTC)

It's true that my religion plays a very large role in my beliefs about the matter. However, seperation of church and state refers to keeping the control of legislation in the hands of a government that would not be directly controlled by the church (i.e. Catholism, the Church of England, Puritans, etc.). However, personal belief is not the church (and in my case it's very much not so), therefore voting based on my beliefs is not a violation of the seperation of church and state. Though, I do agree that my religious beliefs should not be the only deciding factor in my vote.


ReplyThread Parent

abadoss
abadoss
Kenneth Edward Keyn
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 09:55 pm (UTC)

Yeah, I've noticed that. I think that voting a certain way because your church tells you to is a violation.


ReplyThread Parent
llieno
llieno
Elle
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 04:15 pm (UTC)

Out of curiosity, how do you see me and others like me?


ReplyThread
abadoss
abadoss
Kenneth Edward Keyn
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 05:43 pm (UTC)

Well, as I said to appleboy I see you as a human being. I may disagree (and in some cases strongly) with some of you beliefs (particularly sexuality), but I'm still going to think of you and treat you as another human being.


ReplyThread Parent
samhobbits
samhobbits
This is where Maria talks about life
Wed, Oct. 20th, 2004 10:18 pm (UTC)

If you don't know how to vote on a certain issue, then don't! It is better to make no decision than an unwise decision in some cases. As long as you vote on the things you do know, then you are supporting your country. I do know what I will vote for president and for measure 36, and that is all I have decided thus far. If I feel that not enough information has been given about a candidate's office, I don't vote. It isn't homophobic (though I think the term is ridiculous, just because you believe homosexuality is wrong doesn't mean you are afraid of it) to vote yes on 36, and it isn't supporting homosexuality if you vote no on it.
My two cents.


ReplyThread