I’m finding myself in a weird paradox regarding the political spectrum as I mature in my disaffection with the LDS church and the general population of members.
I was brought up in a small town (<5000 residents) by a staunchly politically conservative father, listening to Rush Limbaugh and talk radio. It always seemed to me that rural living and conservatism were the natural order of things.
As a Mormon, I was raised to think that lifestyles outside the Mormon norm were inherently wrong or flawed. This was not drilled into me by any means, but it was not in my nature to question this as I had rarely encountered differing political views or lifestyles. I never questioned politics until I moved to a larger city at the end of my high school career. There, I befriended people of various ethnicities and with varying family lifestyles. In an effort to fit in, be cool, I found it was a window in my life where I was open to new views.
At that time in young life, I experimented with social drugs and tried things outside the norm as I tested my sense of independence and indivuality. I listened to rebellious music and observed life outside a Mormon bubble. Mostly this serene time in my life marked by political apathy and teenage angst and exploration.
This window of open-mindedness quickly slapped shut when I served a full-time LDS mission in Brazil and changed course to the proscribed life plans of every young LDS man. It was after my mission that I re-discovered politics. Without consciously knowing it, I fell back to my roots and started down the road of political conservatism, but swearing that I was not the “Rush Limbaugh” type. Eventually, I even gave that up and found I liked listening to the man and the many other hosts that had cropped up during the Clinton years.
So where is the paradox, you ask? In my experience, most disaffected Mormons come from the left side of the political spectrum. I have always said to myself, “I lost my religion, not my mind” with regard to politics. So, I find myself an outcast among outcasts. I still feel that my political ideology was not driven by my participation in the LDS community, but I do fear that I accepted too many tenets of this ideology on a sense of “faith” in the radio hosts.
So, with my re-discovery of faith, I now found myself re-examining what I believed were non-questionable political beliefs. Not a lot of them, but certain social taboos simply don’t mean as much to me now as they used to. I mostly wish that politicians and fanatical activists on both sides could find easy reconciliation and thereby reduce the amount of rancor in society.
For example, the recent push by uncompromising activists within the gay community to achieve “equality” with regard to marriage. I have finally arrived at a point in my mind where I really could care less how the gays live their life, I just wish they would live it without pushing it so hard on the rest of society that may or may not support the lifestyle.
I am inclined to vote for gay marriage based on a sense of “let’s just get over this”. However, with all the bigotry and misplaced anger against Mormons regarding the recently passed Proposition 8 in California, I could go the other way just to spite these people and teach them a lession! Their latest proposed actions, the so-called “kiss-ins” at Mormon temples seems more likely to create emnity and build a wall with the Mormon community, rather than break it down (which is the intended effect, I hope). Mormons have a serious persecution complex and the gays will play into that by doing this. Isn’t there another way?
Why can we all not be content with a simple civil union which achieves all the benefits of marriage without using the dreaded word “marriage” itself? Could not both sides be content with that or do they really need to have the decades long knockdown engagements that we’re having? Homosexuality may never be accepted by everyone in society at large. That is a fact. Why must conservative activists push so hard to condemn it and the gay activists push so hard to force the issue on those who will always disagree with them? Just, agree to shake hands and live, instead of finding bigotted ways to oppose each other!!
“misplaced anger against Mormons”
Is it misplaced? The Mormon Church donated a lot of money to get Prop 8 passed in California. I think the anger is quite well placed. Not against specific Mormons, but against the LDS church certainly.
“Why can we all not be content with a simple civil union which achieves all the benefits of marriage without using the dreaded word “marriage” itself?”
Because it still isn’t equal to do it that way. The only way the word won’t be used is if the government does away with using it for anyone. And, while that makes sense to me, I don’t see the government ever doing that.
“gay activists push so hard to force the issue on those who will always disagree with them?”
Because the conservative activists are trying to legislate against the gays. Simple as that. If they stop trying to legislate their opinion, then the gay activists (most, anyway) will stop.
Thanks for commenting.
Well, technically the “church” provided free manpower and other inkind donations about a social issue that they (rightly or wrongly) feel passionately about. Individual members of the Mormon community gave money (admittedly at the church’s behest) to a subject they felt strongly about. So did many members of the gay community and their supporters on their respective side of the debate. Can you blame them?
The anger that I feel is misplaced is by those who published a list of donors strictly for the purpose of retaliating for their loss at the polls. Also by those who staked out the business and homes of individual donors to intimidate them. That is wrong and if they had lost at the polls, the Mormons would not have done the same. It is highly ironic that one minority group would protest their sense of inequality by intimidating another minority group.
Regarding the “equality” of a “civil union” vis-a-vis a “marriage”. If we are honest, we will admit that gay relationship by their very nature are not “equal” with heterosexual ones, but are indeed very different. Else why bother with huge rainbow-festooned, raunchy sex-themed parades? My point was that if both sides could compromise (conservative purists often blanch at even the notion of a civil union), this debate would be long over.
However, I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the only solution (as you wisely noted) is for government to quit the marriage business and resort to providing “civil unions” for any couple who wishes one. Let the churches sort out who can be “married”.
“Can you blame them?”
Well…yes. Yes we can.
“The anger that I feel is misplaced is by those who published a list of donors strictly for the purpose of retaliating for their loss at the polls.”
I agree that ‘retaliation’ is something that should not be done. However, the boycott or protest of the businesses who supported something you disagree with does not bother me. As long as it is done within the scope of the law.
“Else why bother with huge rainbow-festooned, raunchy sex-themed parades?”
What does that have to do with gay marriage? Those are gay pride parades. Not gay married parades.
“However, I am quickly coming to the conclusion that the only solution (as you wisely noted) is for government to quit the marriage business and resort to providing “civil unions” for any couple who wishes one. Let the churches sort out who can be “married”.”
I agree.
However, I don’t see that happening. And thus, the next best result is for gays to be allowed to be married.
Sigh. You’re probably right. I guess I just wish that people didn’t have to poke each other in the eye so much and could just co-exist somewhere in the middle without finding so many ways to feel slighted and un-equal.
Re: pride parades. They don’t have anything to do with marriage, but they exist to celebrate the differences of hetero vs. homo relationships, don’t they? If the relationships weren’t different, there would be no cause to have a parade.
“but they exist to celebrate the differences of hetero vs. homo relationships”
I don’t think they have anything to do with relationships. It’s more about celebrating sexuality (which is generally explored by people who aren’t in committed relationships) and different symbols of that particular culture.
Most if not all the gay couples I know are just as boring as the straight ones.