A day after Jeremy and me had a lengthy commentfest on Facebook over the disparity between denying gays equal rights and Mormons being singled out as the main group at fault for denying those rights (they aren't), he posted an article on his page. The article was about a Catholic church that also encouraged its members to vote yes on Proposition 8, and Jeremy commented that he hoped they got picketed too, which prompted me to comment "sigh" in response, which lead to Jeremy inviting me to "get a life" and to stop commenting on his Facebook page "in this manner", which in turn lead to me reminding Jeremy that he might not understand how Facebook works (you can comment on anything you fucking want, however you want, and if someone doesn't like it they can delete it), and ultimately I offered him a solution to the issue: I removed him from my friends on Facebook. That way I can't see his posts, and can't comment on them.But then..
date Fri, Dec 5, 2008 at 11:53 AM
subject My apologies
Hi Matt,
I apologize for my actions on Facebook today. I was far too quick to snap at you.
The reason I post some of the things that I do to my Facebook page is that I love my church and it upsets me when I see people treat it unfairly. I realize that the church itself has acted unfairly in the case of Prop 8, and perhaps I haven't been vocal enough about that. However, the LDS church is like an extended family to me. For this reason, this situation with Prop 8 is a little like when a sibling does something you don't approve of. You aren't going to defend their actions, you may even voice disapproval, but you're not exactly going to shout from the rooftops "My brother is being a big jerk!" The flip side of that is that when someone's being completely unfair to your brother, you're going to get in that person's face a little and tell them so. I guess it's a matter of loyalty. The church has been good to me my entire life. It gives me hope and inspires me to be a better father, husband, son, and, yes, citizen. I know the attention the media gives it usually centers around hot-button social issues, but those issues are not why most people stay in the church and devote so much of the time and resources to it. It's the teachings on self-sacrifice, the importance of family, and our theology that centers around God being our literal Father in heaven.
I hope that makes the situation a little more clear to you. The biggest reason I asked you not to be so confrontational when I posted something was because I don't like arguing with people that I respect. That's why I don't post on message boards anymore. It is for that reason that I think it's best that we're not Facebook friends (it looks like you removed me), but I would hope that we can still continue to respect one another and not have any bad feelings for each other.
All the best,
Jeremy
date Sun, Dec 7, 2008 at 10:22 PM
subject Re: My apologies
Maybe a better analogy would be to consider the entire Church your family. And in this family, the majority, like 4 out of 5, disagree with you on this issue. I understand the part about not wanting to air your dirty laundry by publicly disagreeing with them. and I understand the part about wanting to rise to their defense when someone who is not from your family starts talking shit about the entire family as though everyone in it agrees on this thing. I get that.
But this is a human/civil rights issue. It is literally analogous to denying Mormons the right to marry. that ain't right. I still get the hypocrisy/double standard of picking on Mormons as a whole over this thing, when obviously there are Mormons who disagree with their fellow
members on this. But it's such a big issue, so much bigger (to me) -- yes I am admitting that I don't think Mormons being singled out (or Catholics, or blacks or old folks) is as big a deal as gays being denied the right to marry. I am comparing them. I am saying I don't care as much about this thing as I care about the other thing. Yep.
What galls me is that while you don't seem to think you're comparing one to the other, it's pretty obvious you are more concerned about your family getting picked on than you are about the human/civil rights issue that started this mess. That bugs me. I'd like to see you and others like you try and do something about this, admit your family members are misguided, and get to work opening their minds.
But I also know that in the end, picketing churches is going to make Mormons/Catholics/blacks/oldsters mad, and possibly distract them from the important part: human/equal rights for all. I also recognize that by picketing or whatever, it continues the dialogue, gets people like you thinking about it, as well as people like your Mormon brethren thinking about it. It might be retroactive though, as they just circle the wagons and refuse to admit that this is very much like the Mormon persecution that has happened...
I want a peaceful dialogue. I also know there is no wiggle room when it comes to equality, and I may not be the best candidate to talk equality with people I consider bigots. Anyone, in my view, who feels gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, no matter the excuse (religious/cultural background), no matter who wants to defend them because they are a "family" member, is still a bigot who needs to either learn the error of their ways, or die off eventually so that we as a society can move on.
But I understand why you want to defend your family. I just think it's less important, and I'm disappointed. Overall, we agree that gay marriage needs to be legal, and that picking on any subset of society is stupid and wrong.
Good luck. As a liberal Mormon, you are totally going to need it.
matt
date Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:13 AM
subject RE: My apologies
Just want to correct one thing here: I do disagree publicly with the church on this issue. In church and on Facebook. It doesn't get much more public than that. I'm just not going to try and turn church into a political forum and I'm not going to take a harsh line criticizing the church itself or withhold tithing. There's a difference between saying "This is the position I'm taking." and "This is the position I'm taking and anyone that disagrees with me is just wrong, wrong, wrong." I'm not sure I say that about any issue. The political issue that I feel most strongly about is that everyone should have the same access to health care, and that it is a disgusting evil that we allow corporations to decide who lives or dies. With as strong as I feel about that, I'm not going to get in anyone's face that disagrees that we should have single-payer health care and say "You're wrong, wrong, wrong!" It's simply not productive, and it's not respectful, IMO. If you're ever really bored, feel free to listen to the lyrics of my song "Good Fight Fighting." It talks about exactly what I'm talking about here.
Another thing I wanted to correct: I'm not mad at people like Bill Cope because he's lumping me in with all Mormons on this issue. That is upsetting to me, but what's more upsetting to me about Bill Cope's attitude is the hate and divisiveness he spews. As much as you believe that anyone that is against gay marriage hates gay people, I've never, ever heard a Mormon say that we should shut gay people out of our lives and hearts and public life, which is what Cope seemed to be saying about Mormons. I do agree that gay marriage should be legal, I do see it as an issue of equal protection under the law, I do not think it's right to try to write one's religious beliefs into law, but in the end I personally see more hate in Bill Cope's heart than I have in any member of my faith ever. In the end though, regardless of whether they're justified or not, I'm not sure the use of the words "hate" and "bigot" are rhetorically useful in describing simple opposition to gay marriage. The vast, vast majority of people that oppose gay marriage don't feel they hate gay people, and as soon as you use that word, they're mad at you instead of listening to what you have to say. It's counterproductive, IMO.
Another thing I wanted to correct: I do think it's fair to protest Mormon churches on this. The church took a stand after all. I only ask that the same groups that picket Mormons churches and temples also picket Catholic churches, black churches that are against gay marriage rights, orthodox synagogues, and evangelical churches. With the way that Mormons are being almost single-handedly blamed for this, all I can think of is that people have been storing up all this anti-Mormon hate, and have finally found a socially acceptable outlet for it. I could be wrong about that, but it's a very convincing idea to me given the amount of irrational anti-Mormon hate I see on the internet that has absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage. I also think it's complete opportunism to go so lopsidedly after the widely misunderstood, "wierd," minority church, which makes me unhappy since I would have expected better from liberals. I guess I like to think that people with whom I agree politically are going to treat my church fairly by treating it the same as any other church that took the same stand. I guess I was expecting too much.
" I want a peaceful dialogue. I also know there is no wiggle room when it comes to equality, and I may not be the best candidate to talk equality with people I consider bigots. Anyone, in my view, who feels gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, no matter the excuse (religious/cultural background), no matter who wants to defend them because they are a "family" member, is still a bigot who needs to either learn the error of their ways, or die off eventually so that we as a society can move on."
Yes, I agree. You're definitely not the best candidate to talk equality with. You seem especially confrontational, even with people that agree with you on the issue. Apparently I'm a bigot, and the only way I can not be a bigot is to stop defending my church in any way shape or form, even if they're being treated unfairly, because they took a stand against human rights along with almost every other church. This is what I meant by my "small tent" comment. For a person to not be in the group of people who need to either learn the error of their ways or die, not only do they need to agree with your position and vote accordingly, not only do they need to be open about their position, but this issue needs to override any other concern they might have (which in my case is my belief that Mormons are often treated quite unjustly). Why not say, "Well at least this person is among the minority of people in this country who are in favor of gay marriage. It's good to have someone like him on our side." Why insist on dividing up the world into bigot and non-bigot like you seem to be doing?
(An interesting side note that I probably shouldn't even bring up is that, by your definition of "bigot," you just voted for a bigot for president and vice-president.)
Also, just to close out my email, I wanted to state my sadness and bewilderment, if I haven't made it clear already, that the church took the stand it did on Prop 8. I also want to reiterate that I disagree profoundly with anyone that wants gay marriage to remain illegal. Obviously, my situation is different than yours, and I choose to deal with that disagreement in a different way than you do.
Jeremy
date Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 12:38 PM
subject Oops! Please read this before the other, if you haven't already.
Hey, I just realized that I totally misinterpreted this paragraph:
" I want a peaceful dialogue. I also know there is no wiggle room when it comes to equality, and I may not be the best candidate to talk equality with people I consider bigots. Anyone, in my view, who feels gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, no matter the excuse (religious/cultural background), no matter who wants to defend them because they are a "family" member, is still a bigot who needs to either learn the error of their ways, or die off eventually so that we as a society can move on."
I can see now that you're not calling me a bigot for defending the church, but saying that anyone that's against gay marriage is a bigot, even though I'm defending them for being "family." Sorry about the misunderstanding. Email sucks sometimes.
I can see why my feelings on this bug you or disappoint you or whatever. Point taken. Like I said before, I suppose it's a good thing then that you aren't seeing what I have to say about it in your Facebook feed. I know what it's like to feel the strong urge to comment on something when it rubs you the wrong way.
Jeremy
date Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 4:36 PM
subject Re: Oops! Please read this before the other, if you haven't already.
you sure do know what it's like.
m
date Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 4:52 PM
subject Re: My apologies
On Mon, Dec 8, 2008 at 10:13 AM, jeremy wrote:
> Just want to correct one thing here: I do disagree publicly with the church
> on this issue. In church and on Facebook. It doesn't get much more public
> than that.
Picketing is more public. So is talking about gay marriage without always mentioning Mormons being singled out in the same breath.
> I'm just not going to try and turn church into a political forum
> and I'm not going to take a harsh line criticizing the church itself or
> withhold tithing. There's a difference between saying "This is the position
> I'm taking." and "This is the position I'm taking and anyone that disagrees
> with me is just wrong, wrong, wrong." I'm not sure I say that about any
> issue. The political issue that I feel most strongly about is that everyone
> should have the same access to health care, and that it is a disgusting evil
> that we allow corporations to decide who lives or dies. With as strong as I
> feel about that, I'm not going to get in anyone's face that disagrees that
> we should have single-payer health care and say "You're wrong, wrong,
> wrong!" It's simply not productive, and it's not respectful, IMO.
Denying equal rights to marriage is beyond disrespectful. I'm trying to imagine Gandhi or MLK being told their marches were disrespectful. Or perhaps that is the rub - you'd rather I stay quiet when I see someone saying something that diminishes gay marriage, and instead just march somewhere? or picket?
> If you're
> ever really bored, feel free to listen to the lyrics of my song "Good Fight
> Fighting." It talks about exactly what I'm talking about here.
>
> Another thing I wanted to correct: I'm not mad at people like Bill Cope
> because he's lumping me in with all Mormons on this issue. That is upsetting
> to me, but what's more upsetting to me about Bill Cope's attitude is the
> hate and divisiveness he spews. As much as you believe that anyone that is
> against gay marriage hates gay people, I've never, ever heard a Mormon say
> that we should shut gay people out of our lives and hearts and public life,
> which is what Cope seemed to be saying about Mormons.
Well, people don't say a lot of things they think. And really, denying equal rights of marriage is a hateful act. You can do it with a smile on your face and the best intentions at heart, but ignorance that leads to hateful acts is no excuse for the hateful act.
> I do agree that gay
> marriage should be legal, I do see it as an issue of equal protection under
> the law, I do not think it's right to try to write one's religious beliefs
> into law, but in the end I personally see more hate in Bill Cope's heart
> than I have in any member of my faith ever. In the end though, regardless of
> whether they're justified or not, I'm not sure the use of the words "hate"
> and "bigot" are rhetorically useful in describing simple opposition to gay
> marriage. The vast, vast majority of people that oppose gay marriage don't
> feel they hate gay people, and as soon as you use that word, they're mad at
> you instead of listening to what you have to say. It's counterproductive,
> IMO.
Yeah it's counterproductive, but so is hate. The problem isn't gay people wanting to get married and then recognizing the hate in the hearts/minds of those who would deny them. The problem is the people doing the denying. That's the counterproductive part.
> Another thing I wanted to correct: I do think it's fair to protest Mormon
> churches on this. The church took a stand after all. I only ask that the
> same groups that picket Mormons churches and temples also picket Catholic
> churches, black churches that are against gay marriage rights, orthodox
> synagogues, and evangelical churches. With the way that Mormons are being
> almost single-handedly blamed for this, all I can think of is that people
> have been storing up all this anti-Mormon hate, and have finally found a
> socially acceptable outlet for it. I could be wrong about that, but it's a
> very convincing idea to me given the amount of irrational anti-Mormon hate I
> see on the internet that has absolutely nothing to do with gay marriage. I
> also think it's complete opportunism to go so lopsidedly after the widely
> misunderstood, "wierd," minority church, which makes me unhappy since I
> would have expected better from liberals. I guess I like to think that
> people with whom I agree politically are going to treat my church fairly by
> treating it the same as any other church that took the same stand. I guess I
> was expecting too much.
Gays are even more in the minority than Mormons, no? and they've also suffered far more persecution. No one is suggesting Mormons lose the right to marry, or any group. Just the gays.
It's probably true some people are using this issue as a platform for their bias against Mormons. But again, we wouldn't have a problem if the LDS Church and individual Mormons, in tandem with other subgroups, hadn't decided to take the right to marry away from other people. I mean, there's clearly something wrong here. For no reason other than an irrational fear/hatred/bigotry, one group says no to the other group. something is up. This is the same Church that once said black people bore the Mark of Cain. Same Church that once said men could marry multiple women, but not the other way around. There's some iffy stuff in this very young Church's past. When this gay marriage thing came along.. well anyways.
> " I want a peaceful dialogue. I also know there is no wiggle room when
> it comes to equality, and I may not be the best candidate to talk
> equality with people I consider bigots. Anyone, in my view, who feels
> gays shouldn't be allowed to marry, no matter the excuse
> (religious/cultural background), no matter who wants to defend them
> because they are a "family" member, is still a bigot who needs to
> either learn the error of their ways, or die off eventually so that we
> as a society can move on."
>
> Yes, I agree. You're definitely not the best candidate to talk equality
> with. You seem especially confrontational, even with people that agree with
> you on the issue.
So do you.
> Apparently I'm a bigot, and the only way I can not be a
> bigot is to stop defending my church in any way shape or form, even if
> they're being treated unfairly, because they took a stand against human
> rights along with almost every other church. This is what I meant by my
> "small tent" comment. For a person to not be in the group of people who need
> to either learn the error of their ways or die, not only do they need to
> agree with your position and vote accordingly, not only do they need to be
> open about their position, but this issue needs to override any other
> concern they might have (which in my case is my belief that Mormons are
> often treated quite unjustly). Why not say, "Well at least this person is
> among the minority of people in this country who are in favor of gay
> marriage. It's good to have someone like him on our side." Why insist on
> dividing up the world into bigot and non-bigot like you seem to be doing?
Because this is the fundamental problem between all people - equality. It has got. to. end.
> (An interesting side note that I probably shouldn't even bring up is that,
> by your definition of "bigot," you just voted for a bigot for president and
> vice-president.)
Yes, Obama and Biden and most politicians are bigots, at least in public, when it comes to gay marriage. What a revelation you've shared with me. I honestly assume Obama supports it privately, but as a politician he can't be that courageous for fear of losing everything over one issue. I assume he believes baby steps toward equality, at least on a political level, are the best bet for his future. Maybe not.
> Also, just to close out my email, I wanted to state my sadness and
> bewilderment, if I haven't made it clear already, that the church took the
> stand it did on Prop 8. I also want to reiterate that I disagree profoundly
> with anyone that wants gay marriage to remain illegal. Obviously, my
> situation is different than yours, and I choose to deal with that
> disagreement in a different way than you do.
mmhm
