ATWT Discussion Group

Topic: An interesting situation

I am all for same sex marriages and am happy that the judge in CA overruled the "vote".

HOWEVER, I  do think it was inappropriate for the teacher to ask a student to sing at his wedding unless the families were friendly and had an established relationship (which, perhaps, they have)  I would hope that at the very least, the teacher approached the granddaughter's parents first to ask them how they felt about her taking part in the marriage ceremony. 

Replies: (list all replies)

ITA and

---

Posted by: trkdrvrsqueen
Date posted: Sat Jul 5 10:48:40 2008
Message:
Well I'm a Native Northern California Girl....and to me this is not so unconventional! I think it's a honor that she was asked and she is probably thrilled. Her teacher must think alot of her...and believe me the weding will most likely be FABULOUS!! ; ) 

---

Posted by: Janie
Date posted: Fri Jul 4 14:05:41 2008
Message:

fee, My take on this is that it is a wedding of a gay couple which has just been ruled legal in Calif by some judges, here.  There is a lot of uproar about it because the judges overruled the vote of the people that marriage should be between one man and one woman which IMO is wrong for the judges to do but that's what happens with liberal judges. 

mm, you can clarify this if I am wrong.  :) 

Replies: (list all replies)

Bingo, Janie. The wedding is of my granddaughter's voice teacher and her partner. So I guess Julie (my granddaughter) knows all about gays/lesbians. She's a pretty sharp kid. I remember several years ago asking my daughter if Julie knew how boys were different from girls and she said, yes, two boys in her class had exposed themsselves. It's a progressive private school, so there you are. Not sure what she will sing. She had the lead in the school's production of Annie and if I may say so, she's a pretty darn good singer./mm

Janie, do you really think you have a right to vote about whether I get to have the same rights that you take for granted? If liberal ''activist'' judges in Virginia some 40 years ago had allowed the people's vote to dictate their interpretation of the constitution, anti-miscegenation laws would have remained valid and Richard and Mildred Loving would have been thrown into prison if they returned from exile, just because he was white and she was black. The reason we have judges is that they're supposed to be more qualified than ordinary people. maggimae, why not just tell us your news and your opinion without all this innuendo about it being ''interesting'' and ''unconventional?'' People get married everyday. If your ten-year-old granddaughter really knows ''all about gays/lesbians,'' she must be aware that straight couples are capable of every sex act you can imagine between gay/lesbian couples, plus one.

Well, B d'A, sorry if I offended you, but you are very easily offended. I'm 70 years old and some concepts which have been ingrained in us older folks take a while to change. I'm still trying tofigure out how I feel about all this. I tend to think it is fine for my ten year old granddaughter to know that two people of the same sex have a right to live as a couple and have the same rights as male/female married couples. I do not think it is necessary to go into the graphic details of how they express their love for each other. I will tell you what turns me off is people like you who continue to play the victim and can't wait for an opportunity to chastise others for not thinking the same way you do./mm

I'll grant you that I'm very easily offended, and if I don't agree with what you say or how you say it, I will criticize you for it. But ''playing the victim?'' I haven't asked you to feel sorry for me. I just think that the way you chose to communicate your news and views seemed catty. Instead of plainly saying, ''My ten-year-old granddaughter was asked to sing at a lesbian wedding, and I'm not sure how I feel about her knowing about homosexuality at her age,'' you asked everyone to guess what the ''situation'' was, maybe so that you wouldn't have to say that homosexuality makes you uncomfortable. Well, it doesn't offend me if you're uncomfortable. You can't help that. However, your assumption that Julie knows ''all about gays/lesbians'' because she goes to that kind of school, where she is allowed to see naked boys, is an exaggeration. You don't know that she has heard anything inappropriate for her age. All you know is that two boys, who must have been six or seven years old at most to be in Julie's class several years ago, exposed themselves. To me, that sounds like kids being innocently unaware, which could happen at any school, regardless of its politics.

So you find my post ''catty.'' Sorry, but you are obviously biased and looking for something to get offended about. You want so much for people to see your point of view, but never give a thought to seeing other people's point of view. Additionally, I find your comment that judges are smarter than ordianary people extremely naive. Judgeships are often rewarded to people who have done political favors for candidates. They are definitely not smarter than ordianary people and often have agendas that color their judgments./mm

I do see your point of view and I have said so. You're still figuring out how you feel about homosexuality being out in the open. That's fine. You worry about how many details your granddaughter is learning at that school? That's very responsible of you. However, remarks like ''She lives in California. Need I say more?'' and ''I guess Julie knows all about gays/lesbians,'' and ''Two boys in her class had exposed themselves. It's a progressive private school, so there you are'' are low blows. However, I may be guilty of that myself on occasion. I've received a few wedding invitations from female friends that name only the bride, not the groom, and I've jokingly said, ''How very modern!'' What I said about judges is that they are SUPPOSED TO BE MORE QUALIFIED than ordinary people. Not ''smarter,'' but more familiar with the law, and sworn to uphold justice, not self-interest. Yes, there are incompetent and partisan judges (e.g. those on the U.S. Supreme Court who wanted science teachers to present ''alternatives to evolution'' when there aren't any), but it is still THEIR job description to administer justice and decide what changes to the law are constitutional. Not yours or mine. Would you want to live in an absolute, untrammelled democracy in which you were a minority, and the majority could put your rights to a vote at any time? Do you think the majority of male voters would have allowed women the vote? If the Native Americans had voted on whether to allow European immigrants to land, would you be here? What's good for the majority isn't good for everybody, and that's why we TRY to appoint impartial judges to protect us.

Sorry, I'm afraid you don't see my point of view. You only think you do. You have inferred in my original post something that just isn't there. I am not uncomfortable with homosexuality. I am not uncomfortable with my granddaughter knowing about homosexuality. I only had one child but I did a great job by never lying to her and always answering her questions honestly when she asked them. I am also proud that she is a good friend of my granddaughter's private voice instructor and is happy that Julie will be singing at her wedding. The teacher and her partner were at my daughter's Fourth of July celebration. You have falsely labled me as a homophobe because of something you, from your extremely biased point of view inferred from my original post. Sorry, buddy, but YOU are the one with hang ups, not me./mm

I'm sorry if ''uncomfortable'' is an exaggeration of your ''still trying to figure out how I feel about all this.'' I did not call you a ''homophobe'' and I did not claim to know what those concepts are that you say are ingrained in you. Now, please tell me why you chose to make a riddle of this ''interesting situation,'' what sort of responses you expected, and how Julie's school's sex education policy is exemplified by two little boys dropping their pants.

Sorry, I don't feel I have to explain anything to you. You have a huge chip on yoour shoulder and have decided to talke offence at my post and read things into it that were not intended. I will say that the main reason I post on this board is to engage in intelligent conversation with people who are willing to listen to other POVs and judge them objectively. IMO, you are unable to do this. Obfuscation with sophistic reasoning does not interest me as it doesn't move the discussion forward./mm

---

Posted by: fee
Date posted: Fri Jul 4 11:29:05 2008
Message:

WELL, MM, DON'T STOP THERE!!!  YES YOU DO NEED TO SAY MORE!!!!

What is so unconventional, and what is she going to sing???  

---

---