A New Home

So, I had a nice “rant” post planned in my head, but I decided to honor the Thanksgiving holiday and save it for next week.  Instead, here’s something for which I am grateful…

Before I get to my main point, I'll give a bit of background info. Both of my parents were raised in families that did not identify with any religion, never attended church, etc. When my parents were in their early 20s, they decided to be baptized Catholic. As luck would have it, they met each other right around that same time, ended up getting baptized together, and then got married in the Catholic Church.

My sister and I were raised Catholic...Baptism, First Communion, Confirmation...the whole shebang. We were both active in our church youth groups. I ended up attending a Jesuit university. My sister is now a teacher at a private Christian school. Suffice it to say that our faith has always been a key part of our lives. Jersey was also raised Catholic, up to a certain point. Long story short, some family circumstances caused her to back away from the Church for a while, but she has been ready to return in recent years. We have had MANY discussions about religion and how we plan to raise our children.

For the past several years, I have looked for a local church that feels comfortable to me. The church in which I was raised in CA was always a place of calm, love, and peace. I really felt great being there and considered it home. I've struggled terribly to find anything like that here. In addition to the general "empty" feeling I've gotten from the churches I've attended locally, I began to question whether the Catholic Church was really the best place for us. After all, would a same sex couple (and their kids) be welcome? There is a local church with a gay and lesbian ministry...but I'm not sure I want to be peripherally accepted as part of a fringe group (freak show?).

I began to look elsewhere and found a local Episcopalian church. It's an amazing feeling when something just feels right, like it's the obvious thing that was missing. I was welcomed with open arms and lots of smiles. While I have no doubt that there are Episcopalians who are against my marriage (and I know for a fact that there are Catholics who support it), it's nice to feel like there is an overall INclusive atmosphere, instead of an EXclusive fear.

I've been attending this church for several months and many moments have warmed my heart, with a insistent message of “ALL are welcome.”  Back in July, my favorite sermon was given.  You can read it in its entirety here, but I will quote a couple of my favorite parts.

By classifying people, we sort them into two categories. Us and them. If they are like us, well they can’t be all bad can they? But if they are not like us, they are the other. And if they are the other, then they are not us. And if they are not us, well they really don’t measure up do they? And if they don’t measure up, then we are able to treat them shabbily. We can look down upon them, laugh at them, cheat them, beat them, enslave them, even kill them, because, after all, they are not like us. They are different.

And…

When we see these things happening, or even worse, when we find ourselves doing these things, I urge you to remember Paul’s words to the church in Ephesus. Jesus didn’t come here to create divisions but to heal them. We are not in the church by our own will, but by God’s. We are not a club or a benevolent organization or a fraternity or sorority where we get to decide who is and who isn’t a member. We are decidedly not the Kiwanis club with hymns. We don’t get to review the qualifications of a potential member and decide if they have what it takes to be part of our club. For we are members of a church created by God and it is He and He alone who decides who is a member. And he decided that we all are. For all are welcome in God’s church.

And…

At the general convention our church decided to approve a blessing for same sex unions. I know this is a controversial conversation as many people have strong feelings one way or the other. But it should not surprise anyone that our church decided to take this step. For if we didn’t, we would be failing in our mission to love one another. Jesus didn’t ask us to judge one another, but to love one another. That is what we are doing. We are not setting criteria for membership and deciding who can and who can’t be part of God’s love. We are simply doing what Jesus did. Accepting people and loving them as He found them. This is what we have done for years. From the acceptance of black people, to the role of women in the church, to the conversation about same sex couples, I am proud that our church has always chosen to stay true to our foundational principles. That we should love God and love our neighbors. That is the church I want to belong to, and that is the church I want my children to be part of.

On this Thanksgiving, I am so glad to have found this new home.

Vocabulary - Part 2

Thanks to everyone who read and commented on my post yesterday. I want to take some time now to jump around to a few different points in relation to what I said. As I said yesterday, it's very hard to articulate my thoughts on all of this; the jump from brain to blog is tricky.

* To clarify my personal feeling about insults that are directed my way, well, I can say that I actually feel insulted about .001% of the time. Anyone who would hurl an insult at me, with anything but love (and teasing by friends and family counts as love in my book), is not someone who even matters to me. I'm not just saying that to act tough here; even as a small child who was taunted for being "little miss perfect" or "four-eyes" all the time, I was able to brush it off because those kids had no bearing on my self worth. When I said that I find "gay agenda" as insulting as "faggot" or "dyke," I was honest. I'm not personally insulted by any of it, but I think they are often said with the same ill-will.

* I understand the point that Anonymous made about us standing up for those with intellectual disabilities, since many of them are not able to verbalize their hurt. However, I think it's dangerous to compare slurs on the basis of whether the victim is able to fight back. If I'm hurt by someone who calls me a "dyke" and an autistic person is hurt because someone called them a "retard," then both of those are wrong and arguing which is more wrong is missing the point. We don't get to call certain people names just because they can take it.

* I also agree with Auntie and Mrs. Chili about words having the power that you give them. We make choices all the time, and if we choose to let words affect us, they will. That said, I am careful about what comes out of my mouth on a regular basis, because I feel like a constant stream of negativity does start wearing down good energy. It's not that I don't vent in anger, or make self-depracating jokes. I just try not to do those things too often because I think they gain power with repetition.

* The thread on my message board about homophobia and the gay agenda currently has 149 posts in it. From the discussion about the gay agenda came another debate about gay marriage, which wasn't a huge surprise. JW made a comment (and I know he's just one of many to do so) about being okay with homosexual unions with benefits and state approval, as long as homosexuals don't call themselves "married." To him, civil unions and the like are fine; marriage is not. I've written about this before and I still don't understand what the difference is. Let me put it this way:

I believe that murder is wrong. We could change the word "murder" to "apple-picking" and I would believe that apple-picking is wrong. We could use fifteen other words for it, and I would still believe that it is wrong. No vocabulary change is going to change a core belief of mine. So, why are so many people okay with civil unions and not marriage? Now, I have heard that the problem is that there is a religious connotation to "marriage" and homosexuals are sinners, blah, blah, blah. But why aren't there laws being passed that marriage must be between one man and one woman who believe in God? Atheists get married with little problem. I want the same right.

Ok, that's all I've got for now. My head is so jumbled with my thoughts on this, but I think I've made some of my main points. Go ahead, throw some jumbled crap back at me!

Vocabulary - Part 1

First, a bit of background information:

For the past 4 1/2 years, I have been a semi-active participant on a message board; the site is mainly for discussion about a baseball game, but there is an entire off-topic section in which people discuss movies, music, politics, religion, what they had for lunch, births of children, etc. There is a separate debate forum where things can get pretty heated when people disagree (which is often, of course). I check the boards a few times a day and comment when I feel like I have something to say. I've also met two of the other posters in person.

So, earlier this week, I was reading through some of the recent threads and opened one about the letter that John C. McGinley wrote about the use of the words "retard" or "retarded." Basically, he compared the use of "retard" to "nigger, or kike, or faggot, or jap, or kraut, or mick, or wop" and said that words hurt, so we need to remove such words from our vocabulary. This particular thread was started by someone I'll call JW; he is a conservative Christian with an autistic son and a history of arguing with the more liberal members of the message board. He and I have always gotten along, though we certainly agree to disagree on a lot of issues (like the fact that I am damned to hell for loving a woman).

In response to the topic at hand, I posted the following:

"...my point of view is definitely in the middle somewhere.

Any words can become derogatory, depending on the context and intent. I certainly don't think that the use of any particular word automatically makes someone a bigot. Getting too focused on banning the words themselves is like a dog chasing its tail; we'll be wasting a lot of energy and not getting very far.

That said, I also agree that the casual use of these words can desensitize people and if this brings about education and intelligent discussion, then I'm all for it. Overall, I'd rather see change in people's actions than their vocabulary, and if any discourse leads to that..."

With that done, I opened another new thread. This one started by linking an article about a homophobic incident. Honestly, I didn't even read the article; it didn't end up being my focus in the thread. What caught my eye was JW's response to the incident. He mentioned that people were "pushing the gay agenda" and that was enough to piss me off. So, I wrote:

"FWIW, I absolutely hate the phrase "gay agenda" and find it as insulting as faggot, dyke, or anything similar. It's as though homosexuals are distributing obscene brochures or holding recruiting meetings at which they force people to sign up for a pyramid scheme of satanic proportions. I guess I just see people who are trying to have a consensual relationship (possibly even recognized by the state?!?) with an adult that they love very much."

After another second, I realized I should follow it up with this:

"...just so I stay consistent with what I posted in the thread about using the word "retard"...

I don't think the phrase "gay agenda" should be banned and I don't think that the use of it necessarily means that someone is a bigot. I do hope that there is continued discussion about the issues behind the usage of the phrase and that people's actions can change as a result."

My thoughts are obviously more complex than I can properly explain on a message board, or this blog, but I do wonder what causes someone to worry about the use of one word (retard) and use others (gay agenda) so casually. Is it as simple as differentiating between what hits close to home and what doesn't? Am I wrong to think that actions speak louder than words? If we eliminate the use of some slurs, won't there be others to replace them? Shouldn't an off color joke be an opportunity to educate, rather than a need to silence?

I have more to say on the importance of words, but I will wait until tomorrow.

An Unexpected Debate

This past weekend, a friend of Jersey's came into town for an overnight visit. I had only met him once before, but I had no problem opening up my home to him and going out to a fun dinner on Saturday night. The three of us had a few beers, some really good food, and then a debate that I did not see coming. The subject of same sex couples having kids came up...more specifically, the subject of it being wrong for same sex couples to have kids was brought up by this friend. Now, he knows that Jersey and I want kids, so I was interested in knowing what his particular issue was. I think Jersey was nervous that the conversation would get ugly, but I stayed very calm. It freaks people out when I do that.

His opening was along the lines of "gays shouldn't have kids because they just have kids to show them off and it's damaging to the kids."

Huh?

My response to that was quite simple. "There are, unfortunately, plenty of straight people who do that, too. It's not a gay trait. It's an obnoxious person trait." I then pointed out plenty of examples of parents who live their lives vicariously through their children, parading them around like show ponies, sometimes not even wanting them in the first place. I don't doubt that there are same sex couples who do this, but that has nothing to do with sexual orientation.

Then he reiterated his point about the kids getting "messed up" by gay parents. I told him that, to my knowledge, no psychological study has shown any inherent damage to kids raised in a same sex household. In fact, everything I've ever heard points to a slight edge in compassion and emotional resilience, simply due to increased awareness of sensitive issues. His response was that those studies have only been done since the early 90s, so they don't really prove anything. I ignored the obvious rebuttal that, if they've only been done in the past 15 years (which I doubt, but I don't have the facts), they also don't prove his point. I'd actually go so far as to guess that 15 years is enough time to see signs of emotional damage, if it actually exists.

He seemed to be running out of steam, and not that interested in fighting with someone who wasn't taking the bait. He said that none of it was meant to be a personal attack against us.

I let the argument fade, but it's been on my mind. How sad it is to think about having children when these opinions, and worse, are out there...but how happy I am to plan for my future and the babies Jersey and I will raise.