A few of you probably know by now that Marc and I are no longer active in the LDS church. Over about two years our research and change in perspectives gradually took us to the point where we no longer agreed with the teachings of the church, the presentation of church history, and the administrative choices. Although I’m willing to speak privately to anyone who wants more details, I will not go into the depths of my faith crisis in this letter. I have only one thing to talk about today. This week’s Supreme Court decision and the fact that today is our 14th wedding anniversary have brought me to a place where I feel like I finally have collected some coherent thoughts, and I am ready to share.
Two years ago when I was in the beginning phase of questioning my faith I came across an animated map that showed the swelling of the world’s five major religions. It made me think of all the recorded histories of people in our world and the variety of their religious practices and cultural systems, why would God “put all his eggs in one basket”?
It’s hard to wrap your mind around the ebb and flow of wars, conversions, debates, tolerances, treaties, and conquering that our planet has seen in the name of gods and religions especially considering the amount of recorded history that the majority of us are vaguely familiar with. If I stay within the past two centuries of American history I can think of three times where people of all creeds and cultures came together to re-write the moral conduct of our nation: the abolition of slavery, the civil rights movement, and now marriage equality. All three have one thing in common- basic human rights.
When the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was written in 1948 it established the following: “men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. In 1984(Roberts vs U.S. Jaycees) the Supreme Court ruled that the Bill of Rights clause “freedom of association” protects our freedom of intimate association and sees intimate human relationships as a personal liberty. For decades persons who were homosexually oriented have been excluded from this basic human right. This last decade, probably more, has been a debate to have the parameters of marriage reconsidered so that these rights can be enjoyed by all.
Many argue that the parameters of marriage are not open to interpretation by man, but are ordained of God. The funny thing about God is that his will and personality are of great variety. Some people’s God believes that wine is so sacred that it has its own special blessing while another persons God believes that wine is not to be consumed at all. Some people’s God believes that children are baptised at birth, while another God says age 8. And some people believe in multiple gods each with their own personality. So which god gets to decide the definition of marriage?
Let me diverge for a minute to tell you about a couple I sat behind at an outdoor theater last summer. They were two men who were obviously in a romantic relationship. I watched them happily and peacefully enjoying the concert for quite some time before I noticed a rubber wrist band on one of them printed with the scripture Matthew 19:26, “With God all things are possible”. I made an assumption that this man believed in a god that would someday make it possible for he and his partner to have the right to marry.
Back to it- since one of the religious freedoms that our Constitution provides is the freedom from religion, (the establishment of an official national religion) our courts and our nation must rely on something other than religion and the word of God(s) to change our laws when we as a people desire change. I’m speaking of humanism, “an outlook or system of thought attaching prime importance to human rather than divine or supernatural matters. Humanist beliefs stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek solely rational ways of solving human problems”. Although members of our courts were influenced by a variety of religious and political opinions, they were able to boil the rulings on slavery and civil rights down to an essence of preserving and protecting our humanity. They did it then, and they just did it again.
One of these days, when I’m not taking 15 credit hours, I would like to read the entire court order of the Obergefell vs. Hodges case, but for now I’ll read the closing paragraph with joy in my heart and faith in the discerning powers of humanity.
“No union is more profound than marriage, for it embodies the highest ideals of love, fidelity, devotion, sacrifice,and family. In forming a marital union, two people become something greater than once they were. As some of the petitioners in these cases demonstrate, marriage embodies a love that may endure even past death. It would misunderstand these men and women to say they disrespect the idea of marriage. Their plea is that they do respect it, respect it so deeply that they seek to find its fulfillment for themselves. Their hope is not to be condemned to live in loneliness, excluded from one of civilization’s oldest institutions. They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law. The Constitution grants them that right.”
It is not my intention to flamebait. It is also not my intention to jump on a bandwagon shouting “look at how awesome and accepting I am everyone!”. This is not about me. This is about how I want everyone who desires it to have the opportunity to experience the joy, hardship, triumph, laughter, passion, companionship, solidarity and belonging that I have experienced in my fourteen years of marriage. This is about that one thing that we have left when we strip away beliefs, opinions, histories, and pride….our humanity.
Footnotes pending…I can’t figure out how to do it in wordpress 😦


































































