Avoiding Hypocrisy - Vote YES on Prop 8 !

I said from the beginning that I would probably struggle to be a consistent blogger. There aren't many things that I care enough about to take the time to blog but voting season always brings it out in me. So, here's something I care enough about to take a minute on.

Yesterday evening I was reading a blog posted on a local newspaper website and came across the following statement:

NO ON PROP 8!!!!!

Posted 10/14/2008 1:42 PM PDT on visaliatimesdelta.com

OK so from what I understand, those in favor of Proposition 8 want to protect the traditional definition of marriage. This is ridiculous. Do they not realize that the "traditional definition" of marriage was lost a loooooooong time ago?

HELLO?! People cheat on their spouses, get divorced, get remarried, have children out of wedlock and things like this all the time. Are they saying that they're going to outlaw divorce also??? If I know my history correctly, in the traditional form of marriage divorce was NOT allowed. And even as late as the 1950's divorce was social exile. Yet now it happens all the time! Thats not traditional, so why aren't the supporters of Prop 8 trying to ban divorce also?

You know why? BECAUSE PEOPLE HAVE A CHOICE TO GET DIVORCED!!! Same sex marriage is a choice, if we eliminate that choice haven't we undermined the very basis of our democracy? FREEDOM! Let them have the LIBERTY to marry whoever they want! We're Americans. The first of our ancestors who migrated here on the Mayflower came to escape INTOLERANCE! Are we not hypocrites if we are intolerant to gays/lesbians? Our founding fathers had freedom in mind when they wrote the Constitution. I ask again, are we not hypocrites if we deny this freedom to gays/lesbians?

I don't care what anyone thinks about same sex marriage, because it doesn't matter. We all know that there is hate and controversy about this issue. Frankly, the hate for gays/lesbians just doesn't matter, because it is not their choice to make. Mind your own business and don't try to dictate who can marry who. IT'S NOT YOUR CHOICE. It is not anyones choice but your own who you love, and who you marry. Let's keep it that way. NO ON PROPOSITION 8!!!!

Admittedly, I don't know much about this blogger, her age, her background, her education level so it is not my intent to pick on her specifically but it must be noted that the logic and argument she used was very flawed. Unfortunately, I find this argument very frustrating and even aggravating because I hear it used over and over again and it is absolutely pervasive in society despite its total fallacy; consequently, I responded thus:

"You are wise to predicate your comments on whether or not you "understand your history correctly." Your postulate, that supporting the traditional definition of marriage would make us hypocrites, is based on the flawed supposition that the pilgrims were champions of tolerance. While it is true that an intolerance for their religious practices motivated them to leave England for the Americas, the pilgrims were not leaving England as champions of tolerance, so much as they were simply escaping the tyranny of the "nation-state" of England which denied them the right to practice their religious BELIEFS. You may say that I am quiveling over semantics or saying the same thing in a different way (i.e. you say toe-may-toe, I say toe-ma-toe) but that would not be true.

The bottom line is this: the (pre-USA) Pilgrims believed in a strict moral code guided by their religious background. The pilgrims themselves were not champions of tolerance as we liberally define it today. They were champions of God and morals over State and secular law. In fact, their adherence to and faith in their religion could not have support re-defining marriage then, and it does not now. Many of us BELIEVE, like the pilgrims did, that homosexual marriage is wrong. We also BELIEVE, like the pilgrims did, that the State
has no right to tell us that our religious BELIEFS are wrong as it did when four tyrannical activist judges overturned the peoples' vote. we now have an opportunity and responsibility to stand up against the State in order to PRESERVE OUR BELIEFS. That is, we do not believe that traditional marriage should be re-defined.

It is sad that marriage has suffered the desecration you have described, but that does not mean we should abandon our the faith of our forefathers (the pilgrims) and our beliefs, values, and religions or allow the state to tell us as Christians what we can and can't believe. In fact, it means we should fight harder. VOTE YES ON 8!"

I only had 2000 characters to respond, which was probably good because I struggle with verbosity. However, I felt that there was so much more to say, so, I figured I'd take a moment to elaborate because this subject is far too important for me to stay quiet or apathetic about.

Accusations of intolerance and hypocrisy are flagrantly abused as weapons by today's society. I feel that this is especially true in the case of secularist liberals, who hurl these accusations far too frequently and casually towards those who don't agree with them. This tendency reflects a total lack of understanding of what hypocrisy truly is, and what tolerance really means. Of course, many people have addressed these topics of tolerance and hypocrisy far better than I have so I'll try not to re-tread too much of this familiar discussion. But I do feel compelled to add these few thoughts and feelings:

First: tolerate is not a synonym for accept. It never was and it shouldn't be, no matter how hard society tries to make it so.

Second: Hypocrisy exists when we act in a manner that is inconsistent or incompatible with who we claim to be and what we truly believe. Or perhaps stated more simply, hypocrisy exists when we represent ourselves fraudulently.

Personally, I can tolerate people choosing to engage in homosexual relationships. But when I say tolerate I mean that as long as homosexuals don't try to force me to accept their lifestyle and try force me, through legislation or whatever means, to change my beliefs, then I'm OK with them sticking to their world and letting me live in mine. However, I do not and will not accept homosexual behavior or lifestyles as appropriate, moral, or righteous. Consequently, I cannot and do not accept homosexual unions as equal to a traditional marriage, which I hold sacred as a moral and righteous institution if properly honored. Unfortunately, the misdirected blogger that provoked my response provides some sadly accurate observations regarding marriage. We as a society have not properly honored marriage for a long time. However, that doesn't mean that traditional marriage is now worthless, bad, wrong, or passe, or that its definition should be open for new interpretation. Instead, it just means that as a society we have made a sad and unfortunate mistake of defiling and dishonoring marriage.

Now, if I were to simply ignore this political issue and allow marriage to be re-defined, without opposition, I would be guilty of behaving in a manner inconsistent with my stated beliefs. In other words, it is being apathetic towards, or voting against Prop 8 that would make me a hypocrite, rather than the other way around.

Like many others who have said so, I must note that people who preach that tolerance equals acceptance, and then vehemently express hatred or criticism of religious and social conservatives, are behaving in a manner that is inconsistent with what they are preaching. Unfortunately the problem is absolutely paradoxical for liberals who preach tolerance (i.e. acceptance) of all people, creeds, and cultures, etc. Liberals cannot honestly preach tolerance (i.e. acceptance) of all races, beliefs, creeds, etc. out of one side of their mouth and then out of the other side of their mouth excoriate social conservatives for voting consistent with their stated beliefs. To talk out of both sides one one's mouth like that is, in the very least, inconsistent. At worst it is down right fraudulent and ultimately some liberals must confess that they either don't really believe in tolerance (i.e acceptance) of all people, or they must admit that are phony in their support of gay rights. That is, I think that there are many liberals who don't really believe that homosexual marriage is good, correct, or right but they don't want to appear intolerant. So, to avoid criticism or being labeled a phony liberal they vote against their conscience, feelings, or true beliefs to appear to be accepting and tolerant. This two-faced acting is the epitome of hypocrisy. Many people are pretending to be tolerant when they simply are not. Either they are not truly tolerant of all people because they won't tolerate conservatives or they are not truly tolerant/accepting of homosexuals.

In short, to avoid being a hypocrite, there must be consistency between thoughts and actions. As long as our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are consistent, the label of hypocrite is inappropriate and needs to stop being indiscriminately wielded as a weapon against those who disagree.

While I am losing faith in society's ability to recognize and teach truth and it's ability to be honest with itself, I will continue to vote and fight for what I believe in. My vote will sadden some friends and may even alienate some, but I must be true to my beliefs and trust that true friends will respect my honesty, even if their opinion differs. Even if Prop 8 fails, I will continue to be true to my religious beliefs and be true and faithful in expressing what I believe and feel. Which is this:

I belief that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and is a righteous institution that when properly honored and respected yields great blessings of happiness and Eternal joy. I also believe that any other type or definition of marriage is a fraud and will result in the downfall of society. I also believe that disrespecting and failing to honor marriage through adultery, abuse, divorce, or in any other way will lead to the same downfall. And because I believe that a man should behave consistently with his true beliefs, I must vote YES on Prop 8. Any other vote would be dishonest and hypocritical.