Friday, May 11, 2012

Politics

I am doing great. Better than I've been in half a year. Part of it, certainly, is due to the enormous burden that's been lifted from my shoulders now that I've completed my PhD. I had my doubts, honestly, that I would finish it. Over the past three years, I've questioned my mental fortitude a lot and I've questioned whether I will remain a fully-functioning human being going in to the future. My PhD is a victory, one of several victories I've had recently, and these victories are making me optimistic about the future.

Another reason I'm feeling so well? I got my hip replacement three weeks ago. Sure, I can't go through metal detectors without setting them off anymore, but I can walk again. For the first time in half a year, I'm not in any pain. I can usually deal with pain, but when you're in pain for so long that it becomes a part of who you are, that's a real problem. It affects every aspect of your life. I couldn't even really see the impact that it was having until the pain was gone. But it is gone now, so I'm feeling great. Now I just need to work on my gait.

Months of immobility have done one thing in particular that I'd like to write about today: it made me political. As a young adult, I didn't really care about politics. It's actually a lot like sports (which I also don't really care about), and I never really felt like it mattered much to me. Now that I'm not legally allowed to be on Ted's insurance because it's provided by the federal government, I realize that I care quite a bit. I'm going to try to say this as succinctly as I can.

To my devoutly Christian friends: you know that I respect your beliefs even though I disagree with them. My family is very Christian, and I respect that. I even don't complain about them raising their children to only be exposed to one specific set of Christian beliefs even though I believe that it is detrimental to the children's development. I support their beliefs; not strongly, I admit -- for instance I don't contribute money to my brother's missionary work -- but I do support them.

That's why anti-marriage equality people infuriate me, and they should infuriate you to. The only argument that I have ever heard that has any legal basis for banning marriage equality is the argument that "redefining" marriage will restrict the right to religious freedom. Unfortunately for the anti-marriage equality people, this argument favors marriage equality. I believe that same sex couples should be able to marry. Why is it OK to remove my right to believe something, but not yours? Because I'm an athiest? Wikipedia has a great list of Christian religions that support same-sex marriage. What about their religious freedom?

You can continue to believe that marriage is what you think it is. There has never been a singular, consistent definition of marriage that everyone follows, and even the traditions, meaning, and purpose of marriage has varied significantly over time and across societies. The reason we have so much trouble agreeing on a definition of marriage is that it is hard to define. It means different things to different people. When enough people believe that the definition given by law does not adequately reflect the reality of life, it is time for that law to change. It is past time for that law to change.

So, obviously I support gay marriage, but I truly believe and I think many agree that it's a non-partisan issue. I'm a registered independent though I admit that I have liberal leanings. I understand all-too-well the power of the free market which is why I understand that certain people, especially the poor and historically disadvantaged, need to be protected from it in the interest of fairness. So I admit, I'm a bit biased in favor of Obama. I think that it's true that, just by virtue of being Obama and being irrationally hated by a small, vocal part of the population, America has not seen the progress it has needed. The Republican agenda of austerity, though, has never seemed right to me, and Europe is suggesting that that path would have been dangerous. I really hope that this election removes the obstructionist elements of Congress so that our lawmakers can finally get something done, but I'm not holding my breath.

Anyway, the thing that really prompted this post was the recent post about Romney bullying a fellow student. I don't care that the student was gay. I care that the student was seen as something "other", whatever Romney might have thought about this kid. I consider myself to be a very forgiving person, often willing to attribute bad behavior to a lack of empathy rather than actual malice unless the evidence says otherwise. I want to believe that people, on the whole, are good and want to support their fellow man. So I'd really like to say that this story doesn't affect my opinion of Romney, that it was just a folly of youth.

The reason I can't say that, though, is that the man hasn't changed. He's still a bully, rallying other likeminded people around him to persecute the people he doesn't like. Women, gays, the poor, the elderly, foreigners. They're all fair game to the Republican machine. Romney is comfortable with that, because he wants to be popular. Whether he once supported gay marriage or not, he certainly doesn't now, because that's not what his buddies support. The analogy that Romney is a well-oiled weather vane is incredibly accurate. What we need in these difficult times is not a president who will be swayed by public opinion even though they know that public opinion is wrong.

We need a president who has conviction, and who will do the right thing if they can. I am incredibly proud of Obama. In 2008, I understand that he could not support marriage equality. He needed the votes that he could get. No one believes that he did not personally support marriage equality, but as a matter of policy it was not something that he could take on then. Now, he has come out in support of marriage equality at great risk. He has done so because it is the right thing to do and he thinks that he can still win with that position. For what it's worth, President Obama, I believe you can still win too. I hope that you do. But it will all be for nothing if we fail to remove the obstructions from Congress so that we can put this country back on track. It will all be for nothing if we fail to get the votes to put laws into effect that will give equality to everyone. Re-electing Obama is important, but so is the rest of your vote.

2 comments:

  1. This is a wonderful post. I never understood why people who proclaim to believe in small government who does not interfere in anyone's life would want to spend time thinking about all of our personal lives so much.

    I'm so glad that you're feeling well, and I'm so glad that you can celebrate completing your PhD!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post, Randy. Couldn't agree more with you about marriage equality, and pretty much everything else.

    I loved these lines in particular "Why is it OK to remove my right to believe something, but not yours?" Great question, and it beats me why other people can't see it too.

    "What we need in these difficult times is not a president who will be swayed by public opinion even though they know that public opinion is wrong." Ah, there are many people with this disease, and among politicians, the disease takes a particularly virulent form. Back home, for instance, very few do the "sensible thing"; most just indulge in vote-bank politics.

    Sometimes, I wonder if democracy makes sense, since a "majority" of people need not necessarily make the right decisions. I guess it's the best option compared to the others though..

    ReplyDelete