Just wanted to document an argument between my republican blog writing uncle and myself from when Ref. 74 passed

  • Uncle A triumph for religious bigots all over the state. You must be very proud. Thank God the federal Defense of Marriage Act trumps asinine state laws.
    November 8, 2012 at 1:22pm · Like
  • Nichole Czajkowski It’ll be okay, Uncle Jeff. Thank your god, and I’ll be proud that Washington is lawfully recognizing marriage between two consenting adults.
    November 8, 2012 at 2:19pm · Like · 2
  • Uncle If the state could do so without simultaneously repudiating the heartfelt, constitutionally protected beliefs of adherents to every mainstream religious denomination in the world, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. Unfortunately, it can’t. 

    You know I’m no religious zealot, nor am I someone who reflexively hates gays. But I’m cursed by an overwhelming need to approach problems logically rather than emotionally, and in this case it’s perfectly clear which side is displaying hate and trying to force its views down the other side’s throats.

    Don’t believe the lies. In Washington state, we already have a domestic partnership law that gives same-sex couples every practical advantage married couples have. But it’s not about practicality. It’s about using the government to officially sanction your lifestyle – and that’s not the role of government. 

    Don’t flatter yourself that you’re demonstrating tolerance and open-mindedness about this issue. What’s tolerant about being sympathetic to a behavior that doesn’t offend you in the first place? If you want to show tolerance for someone, how about a little for people you don’t agree with?
    November 8, 2012 at 2:41pm · Like
  • Nichole Czajkowski Same-sex marriages will not and does not infringe on religious freedoms - just as I may not approve of certain couples getting married, those who associate themselves with a certain religious belief can disapprove of certain couples getting married, as well. That doesn’t mean my personal thoughts or beliefs should be made into law , excluding a group of people, and ultimately (although not blatantly) forbidding them from protections and rights actively enjoyed by others. Members of religious communities are free to restrict themselves based on what their religion dictates - that dictation should not be extended to restrict others under the guise of religious groups being “forced” to “accept” what they think is wrong. THAT is what I call hateful and forceful.

    Religions do not own marriage - and while the government may not play a role in sanctioning a lifestyle (which I do not consider being a homosexual a “lifestyle”) - it also doesn’t play the role of enforcer of religious mores onto the population. Officially, ALL marriages are recognized through the court system - not church. It serves a civic function, and should be defined to include all citizens regardless of their sexuality or what a religion says.

    There are no lies to believe that Washington offers many safeguards to domestic partnerships that are given to married couples. The broader picture is that the legality of same-sex marriages at the state level will be a stepping stone to federally recognized marriages - allowing same-sex couples to have a union without limitations. DOMA has been found unconstitutional by two federal courts - “…Congress shall make no law respecting established religions…” 

    My sympathies on same-sex marriages fall not with what I do or don’t find offensive - my sympathies fall with the couples who have been committed to each other for years, are contributing, tax-paying members of society, have or are currently raising children who also are/will become outstanding members of society, who want the legal protections offered to every other family in America - and who won’t settle for compromised rights. This is not about religious freedoms or religious beliefs - it is about allowing a group of American citizens the same civil and human right all other Americans are entitled to pursue. I respect a person’s religious beliefs; I don’t respect demeaning a group of citizens or a state law that goes in the correct direction.
    November 8, 2012 at 5:45pm · Like · 3
  • Other Uncle Wow, Nichole. Well stated. Where’s that kid I saw a few years ago? 

    Many people need to take a good hard look at why they are so f’ing miserable about other people’s happiness, as if their pathetic insecurities will be cured by state enforcement of religious norms. Maybe people will stop looking for someone else to blame for their perceived lack of social nirvana. 

    Got an institution you want to protect? Treat it with respect, teach it to your progeny, and hope for the best. Just keep our government out of it. I know a large family that is about 1-for-holyshithowmanydivorcescanwepossiblyhandle when it comes to “traditional” first marriages, so there goes the “respect the institution” part. After that, the rest falls, without the help of the evil godless fags.
    November 11, 2012 at 10:05am · Like · 2