Marriage Equality.
Get over it.
The testimony for B012 this afternoon was stellar. Absolutely stellar.
And, there was no opposition.
None. Zippo. Zilch. Nada.
Except, from a member of Committee 11 - Social and Urban Affairs - from a deputy from SW Florida who felt compelled to name the "concerns" voiced to him by those who are "conservative".
Here they are. Ready?
1. Just because it's legal does not mean it's right.
Sigh! You know what is most annoying about these guys? They can't be creative or original.
This is the same argument used by the anti-abortion folk.
Here's my answer: You're absolutely right.
Slavery was once legal. That didn't make it right.
Discrimination based on gender, age, physical ability and race was once legal. That didn't make it right.
It is legal, right now, to deny me my civil right to marriage. That doesn't make it right.
Next?
2. There is no official TEC position which identifies LGBT people as being "a wholesome example to the people".
You're right. Absolutely. Sounds like a new resolution to me. You know. Just to get this out of the way.
Next?
3. B033 has not yet been discussed or decided. Why are we looking at marriage equality?
Right again. Take it up with the folks at "Dispatch of business."
4. Claiming that this is a 'justice issue' isn't fair. There's nothing to argue and it closes down conversation.
Bingo! Brilliant.
Oh . . .and. . . . DUH!
So, if that's all they got, they got bupkus.
No wonder Kendall Harmon stayed in South Carolina. Sounds like he's got lots to coordinate in the Anglican Communion.
I also testified tonight at the Ministry hearings on C013 Support for those studying for ordained ministry. It's the resolution I wrote with Kevin Martin, Dean of the Cathedral at the Diocese of Dallas.
Yeah. You heard that right. Some things are so obvious, even theological differences on social issues don't matter.
The Archbishop of Canterbury speaks to General Convention at Eucharist tomorrow morning.
Don't expect anything spectacular. It's bound to be more of the same-old-same-old.
But, it will sound highly intelligent and very articulate and everyone will be so very, very impressed.
Film, as they say, at 11.
Hi Elizabeth,
ReplyDeleteRacial intermarriage was once legal. That didn't make it right.
I think you mean the exact opposite of what you typed. Clarify?
Wow! And I couldn't agree with your last few lines more.
ReplyDeleteGot it Kirstin. I've decided that if I write at the end of long days like this, I'm not going to publish until after I read it again in the morning. Thanks.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Joie
ReplyDelete"4. Claiming that this is a 'justice issue' isn't fair. There's nothing to argue and it closes down conversation"
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry, I really wanted to respond to this in depth but I hurt myself when I fell off the chair laughing.
In the real world, you don't say "Duh," right? May I suggest, "I"m glad your brought that up!" (heh heh heh).
ReplyDeleteYou're right; they got nuthin'.
Another one to watch, D043...?
ReplyDeleteIn any case, I can't tell you how tired I am of the same old arguments and the same old impasse. But it sounds like there was a crowd of witness here, and I hope it helps.
Rather than die on procedure in committee.
D043? We're on it. (Check the list of resolutions being tracked by EWC. Many of the same - and more -are being tracked by Integrity.)
ReplyDeleteHey, aren't you supposed to be in a committee meeting or somthin'? ;-)
ReplyDeleteCan you say, "Multitasking?" :~)
ReplyDeleteClaiming that this is a 'justice issue' isn't fair. There's nothing to argue and it closes down conversation"
ReplyDeleteHe really said something that stupid?
What if that was applied to slavery, child labor, sweatshops, forced marriage, or marital rape?!?!
What Bill said!