Two Wolves and a Sheep

Politics warning: I plan to be candid about my views on this blog. And I do plan to talk about all the subjects near to my heart: marriage, kids, homeschool, religion, politics and hobbies. But I'll try to give warning for any who might stumble upon this post and get more than what they wanted to hear.

Ever heard the saying that Democracy is like two wolves and one sheep deciding what to have for dinner? Well, this saying has been on my mind since the recent events in California. The debate about gay marriage on the opposing side seems to focus on these issues: moral wrongdoing and also majority rule vs. constitutional protection of the minority from the majority. And on the advocating side, it appears that the issue is equal rights: I want to marry whom I love, just like heterosexual couples can.

My view is as follows: I believe that legislating morality is difficult, but should be done to protect peoples rights. For example, killing and stealing are illegal. Abuse, harassment, driving drunk and smoking in (most) public places are illegal. But all moral decisions that can be left up to the individual, should be. For example, what clothes to wear. Or maybe whether or not to consume alcohol. Or if or which religion to follow and how. How long to keep your grass or your hair. What standards and opinions to raise your children with.

I feel that to pass a law that denies, forbids and makes illegal something that was a right previously is wrong. I think that for two people to marry is up to them, a private decision. I am allowed to marry whom I love. It does not defraud me of anything, even should I disagree on my personal, moral grounds, for gays to marry. Regarding our constitution, I believe that one of its very valuable functions is to protect the rights of the minority when the majority would take it away. Case in point. I notice that Judge Walker is taking heat for being gay while ruling in their favor, but I guess it's obvious to everyone that every Judge is going to be gay or straight, making every Judge unfit to decide the case. Bit of a quandary...

On the spiritual side, I do not believe it's wise to try to vote in all my beliefs, mainly because that isn't how Jesus went about being an example. I haven't noticed Jesus doing any forcing of his will, and I don't feel qualified to take a role he refused. He did say to love our neighbor AS ourself, and he then gave an example of people that would see someone they thought was filthy and unclean and would pass right by them, never giving help or aid. No caveats, either. So as much as in me lies, I will try to live peaceably with all men, keeping true to what God has told me to do about my own life and try not to oppress those who have exercised their free will to make choices other than mine.

So I just wanted to advocate for the civil rights of all humans, knowing that if this world were ruled by gay's, I sincerely hope they would still grant me the right to marry a man. Let's be fair, doing unto others as we'd have them do unto us. I do value my right to marry, to live out a religion of my choice, to homeschool, raise kids as I see fit, etc. I don't want to be found stepping up and taking special action to prevent others from making personal, private choices for their lives.