Quit a friendship due to political/social issues?

[risingsun]

I wish that I could take this picture and metaphorically smack her in the head with it

I would like to take issue with this diagram. It is a very insular view of who comrises the dominant culture. Whites are not the dominant culture in South America, Africa, China, Japan, Korea, the South Sea Islands, the Middle East, et. al. If this argument about dominant cultures and their place in sustaining biases is to have any relevance, I believe we must take a global view of the situation. Even among whites, there are various cultures who are miles apart in their upbringing and belief systems. Have you met people living in the hollers in the southern mountains? What do you know about Old Order Mennonites? I know, as a counselor, that there are many differences within the so called dominant culture in this country. It's more than time to find a new paradigm for discussing different cultures, their beliefs and their biases. Within a culture, there can be as much oppositon to a same sex marriage as between cultures. I am a reform Jew. We are open and affirming to same sex marriages. Our Orthodox counterpoints are not. Yes, there are differences between cultures, but we ignore the differences within cultures at our peril. It is an oversimplification that deserves more research and credence. We need to do better.

 

[Imdanny]

My answers are in bold
I agree that this is unfair, according to the definition which would call 'fair' treating everyone exactly alike. However, as I stated before, I do not believe it is arbitrary.
I do not, for instance, have the right to park in a handicapped parking space. Strictly speaking, in one sense it would be fair if I could, but in a larger sense it is unfair because I can walk well. The rules should not be the same for me--exact equality is not always true fairness.
While there are certain things that the state should not deny to same sex couples, such as the right to visit one another in the hospital when sick and inheritance rights, there are others which as I stated before are based on the fact that women get pregnant, women get behind in their careers when pregnant, not granting women certain things, such as maternity leave, the husband's pension and tax breaks while raising children is something it is society's interests to encourage. Marriage is encouraged for the protection of women and children. I don't see how its discriminatory not to grant a couple to whom these things cannot apply and I in fact fear that a very likely scenario in this whole matter is that what you brought up at the end will happen. Marriage will be eliminated as a matter of law for everyone and women and children will be punished more than they already have been by many of the things that were supposed to create more equality for women. After 40 years of the women's movement in this country, the situation we now have is that you still don't get the same work for the same pay, you do get the same education now but it's of no value in terms of practical things, like getting paid for doing the same job, the jobs that women end up getting, except for a privileged upper class minority are exhausting, and not especially fulfilling but completely necessary in terms of paying the mortgage; there is the double shift as the help at home is not there; and the things that society used to do to protect you as a mother and wife have been eroded. The elimination of the institution of marriage because of a misguided idea of fairness will be the last blow.

Black Jade, you wrote, "The elimination of the institution of marriage because of a misguided idea of fairness will be the last blow."

My questions would be: is there evidence, any evidence whatsoever, that in US states and in other countries where same sex marriage is the law today, that marriage is on its way to being eliminated?

Is there any evidence that same sex marriage in the places where it is legal today has had any negative effects on the society at all?

As I read it, nobody has suggested eliminating marriage. The argument, as I see it, is that if, and only if, marriage is going to be conflated with religious beliefs, which is against the US Constitution, very much so, that maybe we should have civil unions for everyone. Civil unions are a matter of civil law as opposed to religious law. This would not change the marriage statutes one iota. My state just passed a civil union bill. Do you know what it does? It simply says the statues that apply to marriage apply to civil unions. It's not even a very long bill. It's a few pages long. Is marriage going to be eliminated in my state? I can't see any chance of that happening whatsoever. I don't see mothers and children being harmed one iota, either. The only thing I can see that might happen is that if the law continues to evolve, my state might be forced to eliminate its new separate but equal legal categories and apply the same statutes to everyone, which frankly, they're doing anyway.

 

[iLander]

Wow, iLander...what a sad story!! With everyone being so easy to find and reconnect with on the internet these days, is there any way you can look her up on facebook and send her a message? I would hate to have a good friendship ruined permanently over a misunderstanding. I feel for you!

I'm not on facebook, but I did try to call her a few times afterward and she either hung up with a quick "I've gotta go", or wouldn't come to the phone. I gave up after a while.

 

[iLander]

She stopped talking to you after that?! Wow. ......even after you said "leukocytes, immunity?" ......

Yup. I hope that one day she sees it mentioned on TV or at the doctor or something, and suddenly understands what I meant. But she's probably forgotten all about me by now. I saw her hubby on the street one day a couple of years later, and he just gave me a dirty look and turned and walked off.

Isn't this common knowledge to people, what they're called? I thought it was pretty commonly understood . . .

ETA: Looking back, I'm a little miffed. I think she could have at least listened to me explain for 3 minutes, considering how we used to be pretty close. I'm more timid about friendships now, and this whole experience was one of the many reasons why I am more closed.

 

[Laila619]

She stopped talking to you after that?! Wow. ......even after you said "leukocytes, immunity?" ......

Yup. I hope that one day she sees it mentioned on TV or at the doctor or something, and suddenly understands what I meant. But she's probably forgotten all about me by now. I saw her hubby on the street one day a couple of years later, and he just gave me a dirty look and turned and walked off.

Isn't this common knowledge to people, what they're called? I thought it was pretty commonly understood . . .

ETA: Looking back, I'm a little miffed. I think she could have at least listened to me explain for 3 minutes, considering how we used to be pretty close. I'm more timid about friendships now, and this whole experience was one of the many reasons why I am more closed.

Honestly, if she could stop being your friend so quickly for a silly and minor misunderstanding, then you are better off without her, ilander. I would think she should know you were referring to white blood cells! It's a pretty common term.

 

[merilenda]

I just want to say that I basically agree with everything Thing has said. I have yet to hear an argument against fully legalized gay marriage that I can understand.

+1. Also, 100% agree with what Circe has been saying.
Circe, I really respect your stand on issues that divide our society these days!
Coming from Europe, which is very liberal and tolerant, I am sometimes wary of openly expressing my views, but it is nice to read posts like yours.

Yes, agreed with this.

BlackJade, I feel that we just have fundamentally different views of marriage in general. To me, marriage is about making a legal commitment to spend your life with someone and receiving certain legal benefits in return. Has the concept of marriage evolved over time? Certainly. But I have with marrying the ideas (sorry, dumb pun) of marriage and procreation too closely.

You said "While there are certain things that the state should not deny to same sex couples, such as the right to visit one another in the hospital when sick and inheritance rights, there are others which as I stated before are based on the fact that women get pregnant, women get behind in their careers when pregnant, not granting women certain things, such as maternity leave, the husband's pension and tax breaks while raising children is something it is society's interests to encourage. Marriage is encouraged for the protection of women and children. I don't see how its discriminatory not to grant a couple to whom these things cannot apply and I in fact fear that a very likely scenario in this whole matter is that what you brought up at the end will happen."

That has potential consequences for heterosexual couples as well. What about older heterosexual couples who are past the years of childbearing? Do they no longer need to be afforded the legal protections of marriage? What about heterosexual couples who are unable to have children?

 

[Autumnovember]

She stopped talking to you after that?! Wow. ......even after you said "leukocytes, immunity?" ......

Yup. I hope that one day she sees it mentioned on TV or at the doctor or something, and suddenly understands what I meant. But she's probably forgotten all about me by now. I saw her hubby on the street one day a couple of years later, and he just gave me a dirty look and turned and walked off.

Isn't this common knowledge to people, what they're called? I thought it was pretty commonly understood . . .

ETA: Looking back, I'm a little miffed. I think she could have at least listened to me explain for 3 minutes, considering how we used to be pretty close. I'm more timid about friendships now, and this whole experience was one of the many reasons why I am more closed.

That's exactly why I find her behavior so appalling.

 

[risingsun]

There appears to be a great deal of support in this country for same sex marriages. Has anyone done the math and discovered where this support is coming from? How did same sex marriages become the defining issue in this thread? I have friends with many views different than my own. I don't need or wish to surround myself with others who think exactly the way I do. I won't leave a friendship unless the beliefs are beyond my tolerance level. That is something which I have to decide.

My daughter and her girlfriend live in Massachusetts. I look forward to attending their wedding one day soon.

 

[ksinger]

There appears to be a great deal of support in this country for same sex marriages. Has anyone done the math and discovered where this support is coming from? How did same sex marriages become the defining issue in this thread? I have friends with many views different than my own. I don't need or wish to surround myself with others who think exactly the way I do. I won't leave a friendship unless the beliefs are beyond my tolerance level. That is something which I have to decide.

My daughter and her girlfriend live in Massachusetts. I look forward to attending their wedding one day soon.

Interesting info here...
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1755/poll-gay-marriage-gains-acceptance-gays-in-the-military

 

[risingsun]

There appears to be a great deal of support in this country for same sex marriages. Has anyone done the math and discovered where this support is coming from? How did same sex marriages become the defining issue in this thread? I have friends with many views different than my own. I don't need or wish to surround myself with others who think exactly the way I do. I won't leave a friendship unless the beliefs are beyond my tolerance level. That is something which I have to decide.

My daughter and her girlfriend live in Massachusetts. I look forward to attending their wedding one day soon.

Interesting info here...
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1755/poll-gay-marriage-gains-acceptance-gays-in-the-military

Thank you, Karen, for posting these findings. Sometimes we are so sure we know what other people think that we make assumptions based upon anecdotal evidence or the politically correct information that we learn. Opinions about same sex marriages and many other politcal/social concerns are far more complex than we make them out to be.

 

[aviastar]

I stand by what the graphic states in relations to racism here in the United States. Institutionalized racism has only existed when it's perpetuated by white people towards non-white people.

I believe that people from different racial backgrounds can be PREJUDICED towards another i.e "black girl made fun of me for being white" - but racism and being prejudiced are two different things.

I think we- at the root- would agree, and your historical analysis is indeed well thought out and succinct; however I would stand by my desire to change the language to two seperate subjects. Not 'racism' and 'prejudice' as you have stated, but 'racism' and 'race-relations in the US'. I think that in order to be clear you have to place the discussion, and the graphic, in the context in which you wish to use it- and that is not clear from the graphic alone.

By leaving the context out you run the risk of so narrowly defining racism, as a whole, that we will never find a way to fight it effectively in a global sense. For me, it would be the same as defining ageism as only the young judging those older than they- which is most common- but the definition of the word must include the possibility that it can be practiced outside the most common forms, or we will only ever address a sliver of the ignorance and prejudice out there.

I agree with rising sun:

I wish that I could take this picture and metaphorically smack her in the head with it

I would like to take issue with this diagram. It is a very insular view of who comrises the dominant culture. Whites are not the dominant culture in South America, Africa, China, Japan, Korea, the South Sea Islands, the Middle East, et. al. If this argument about dominant cultures and their place in sustaining biases is to have any relevance, I believe we must take a global view of the situation. Even among whites, there are various cultures who are miles apart in their upbringing and belief systems. Have you met people living in the hollers in the southern mountains? What do you know about Old Order Mennonites? I know, as a counselor, that there are many differences within the so called dominant culture in this country. It's more than time to find a new paradigm for discussing different cultures, their beliefs and their biases. Within a culture, there can be as much oppositon to a same sex marriage as between cultures. I am a reform Jew. We are open and affirming to same sex marriages. Our Orthodox counterpoints are not. Yes, there are differences between cultures, but we ignore the differences within cultures at our peril. It is an oversimplification that deserves more research and credence. We need to do better.

We need to do better.

 

[Imdanny]

Reading recent posts, I thought I should add this. When I said most American favor same sex marriage, I was referring to this Gallup poll.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/first-time-majority-americans-favor-legal-gay-marriage.aspx

 

[weddedbliss]

I could not tolerate something like that. I have friends with different political and social opinions, but none of my friends make racial or other types of slurs. There is a difference between an opinion (like agreeing with Fox News) and a bias (like using racism). One I can handle, the other I can't. My friends can talk about their outlooks without being demeaning. We can have a conversation where we disagree and then agree to disagree without using stereotypes. She just sounds crazy to me. But, I also have high standards, I guess. I expect my friends to have opinions without putting others down. If a person is truly educated in what they know, they don't need to use insults and slurs. It's just a sign of ignorance and/or insecurity.