bovil: (Default)
[personal profile] bovil
repost as much or as little (or none) of this as you like:

Are you a California voter?

3 years ago, we had a commitment ceremony. It was presided over by a minister. 3 months ago we got married. It was provided over by a minister. California Proposition 8 isn't about religious rights. This is about denying religious rights.

You can't save marriage by destroying marriages.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my marriage.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my family's life.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to destroy my friends' lives.

A vote for California Proposition 8 is a vote to ruin the lives of ordinary Californians.

And I'm going to take it personally.

What? You don't vote? It's too hard? It's too inconvenient?

I'm going to take that personally too. An abstention might as well be a vote in favor. Get your sorry ass registered and out to the polls. Read up on the other propositions too. Read up on the candidates for office. Do your fucking civil duty.

Date: 2008-10-14 10:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bovil.livejournal.com
Athiest here. Personally couldn't care less about "eyes of God."

What it would remove is the rights and responsibilities, the civil contract that goes along with marriage.

Date: 2008-10-15 06:47 am (UTC)
howeird: (Default)
From: [personal profile] howeird
Nods.

I don't think couples should have any more rights than single people, but as long as they do, everyone who wants to should be able to join that club. I wonder how long it will take for Congress to repeal that idiotic Defense of Marriage Act?

indulge my curiosity

Date: 2008-10-22 07:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] muttering-ogre.livejournal.com
Why, being so extremely athy (though others might challenge you for the title of athiest), did you have a minister preside?

Re: indulge my curiosity

Date: 2008-10-22 07:45 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] bovil.livejournal.com
A few reasons...

Commitment ceremonies aren't something with a direct legal/civil equivalent. The minister in our commitment ceremony is a friend of ours. The religious component (which was very non-denominational pagan) satisfied some of the participants and attendants, and while I don't believe in the supernatural the basic ritual structure appeals to me.

For the marriage? While we could have had a civil officiant, we don't have a lot of friends who are legal civil officiants and getting married by a stranger is rather impersonal. We do have friends who are ministers (in this case, [livejournal.com profile] johnnyeponymous). The ceremony was, rather than a complex ritual, a bare-bones legal ceremony.

And, frankly, it's a poke in the eye to the folks who say that same-sex unions and marriages are an affront to religion (not just their religion, but Religion). We had two different ministers from two different churches who were perfectly happy to preside over our ceremonies.

Profile

bovil: (Default)
Andrew T Trembley

June 2011

S M T W T F S
    1 2 34
5 6 7891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jul. 23rd, 2025 07:20 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios