Empathy, or Lack Thereof

You meet someone.  You cautiously reach out.  You learn about each other, and as you do, a bond forges.  Chemistry, infatuation, fate, destiny, whatever the reason at some point you both decide it’s something more than friendship; it’s something you want to build on, to invest time and effort in for the promise of a better future.

No one knows ahead of time if it will work out.  The latest numbers suggest about half determine it was a mistake, and move on.

Now imagine that as you are going through that, someone else steps in and says:

Whoa, there!  I forbid you to give in to your feelings.  I forbid you the opportunity to find out if you are really meant for each other.  I forbid you to formalize your bond in the eyes of society and the world.  And I do so because I choose to selectively interpret a book of fables.

I speak, of course, of gay marriage, and opposition to it by the intellectually and morally challenged.

That the subject of gay marriage is spoken about in the context of the upcoming elections is to me evidence to the fact a significant portion of the population has their head up their ass.

Now, I understand I am going to piss off some people who read this.  Some likely left at the end of the last sentence.  I don’t mind.  Having worked in and with GM for many years, I learned there is no help for people who have their head up their ass.  They don’t get enough oxygen, you see, so it’s difficult for them to think clearly, if at all.

Now, I could debate the biblical arguments, such as they are.  I could mention some christians ignore certain portions of the bible, and other christians focus on them to justify all manners of sins, and that in the end it’s all a matter of choice as to what the faithful choose to follow (nearly two thousand different sects of christianity support my point).   I could mention there is no direct quote by the chief zombie with regards to homosexuality, only to have someone bring up Matthew 19:11-12, and then others bring up John 5:46-47.

I could go into the Declaration of Independence and find the words “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” associated with inalienable rights of every human, and that the purpose of government is to respect, and not to limit those rights, but then some poorly educated, mouth-breathing-idiot will argue the interpretation of it, and read more into the words than their intent or what they mean.  

No, none of that.  Instead, I will focus on empathy.

There are many definitions of empathy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empathy), and they covers a broad spectrum of understanding.  Since this post is about my opinion, I will define it according to my understanding.

Empathy is the basis of compassion.  It is the ability to see yourself in other people’s stead, and consequently realize when action, words, or even silence hurts others in a way you would not want to be hurt.  

In my opinion, empathy is the single most important trait differentiating humans from shit-slinging primates.

Treat others as you would have them treat you.”  Christians claim this idea as their own, but it predates them by thousands of years.  It is such a simple and basic idea that it has been used to resolve conflicts between disparate parties since recorded history.  And christians mostly ignore it.

I firmly believe christians who oppose gay marriage have no empathy, and I’m not surprised by it.

History has shown  that if you do not conform to the arbitrary and ever-changing understanding of what it means to be a christian, you are not only considered inferior, but also a threat to the “christian” way of life.  

You are characterized as not worthy of those rights enumerated so eloquently in our historical documents.  You are not deemed capable of living your life as a contributing member of society, and in fact are actively barred from participating.  You are not recognized as a human who lives, loves, and feels.  You are seen as an abomination.

You can then be ostracized, penalized, ridiculed, and if it comes to it, killed, all without any feeling of remorse.  Christians claim the bible says so.

I pick on christians because they are most vocal in this country, but other religions are just as backwards.  Of course, other religions don’t have as much sway in the political arena of these United States . . . yet.

To defend their persecution of others, christian cite doomsday scenarios.  Scenarios which are never fully explained, like the one predicting dire consequences to the institution of marriage should gay marriage become legal.  Aside the fact none of the predictions made ten years ago are even remotely close to the reality we live in, it’s difficult for me to follow their logic.

For the life of me, I can’t imagine how two people of the same sex marrying would impact my own, or anyone else’s marriage.

People will see it as an alternative to traditional marriage!

I’ve never heard anyone explain how legalizing same sex marriage would prompt currently heterosexual individuals to branch out.  Perhaps many christians are closet homosexuals and lesbians, and the leadership fears massive defections from the ranks.

No one explains the mechanism by which the institution of marriage would be weakened and destroyed by allowing two people to commit their lives to each other.  It make no sense.  But then it did not make sense when people argued against, and erected legal and social hurdles for, couples of different colors to marry.  An abomination, they argued, before the eyes of god and its loving disciples.

Some of the loving disciples are even willing to kill to keep it from happening.  

While illogical, saying gay marriage will destroy the “institution of marriage” is nothing compared to this incredibly idiotic comment that crossed my path: “What next?  What if people want to marry animals?  Should we allow that as well?”.  

Am I annoyed?  You betcha!  High unemployment, massive debt, energy concerns, environmental concerns, a financial crisis looming ahead for both the US and the world,  and half of the current elected legislators are more preoccupied with oppressing a minority of the population than with actively and forcefully legislating for the good of all.  

There are other important issues, to be sure, but this is, to my mind, a matter of human decency. Of compassion.  Of recognizing the same rights in others that I want for myself.

To you, the person who actively, or by tacit consent, oppress your fellow humans, and deny them what you claim for yourself . . . look in the mirror.  Look into your eyes . . . do you recognize the shit-slinging primate behind them?  Is that who you want to be?  Then, you are no friend of mine.

<><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><o><><><><><><><><><>

About awards: Blogger Awards          About “likes”:   Of “Likes”, Subscriptions, and Stuff

Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not personally hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.  

. . .  my FP ward  . . . chieken shit.

14 thoughts on “Empathy, or Lack Thereof

Add yours

  1. “Great Crap” indeed today. This issue befuddles — and angers and saddens — me so very, very much. I mean more the absolute vitriol and the conviction behind so many of the opponents of gay marriage (hell, even the more tempered reactions of the more moderate opponents). They bring forth all those tired arguments which, to my mind, can be undone with a few deft tugs. (I.e. “Really? The children won’t understand? It’s not just that they’d be reacting to your own hysterical cues regarding the issue?” “The Bible says it’s wrong? You know we don’t live in a theocracy, right?”)

    Even allowing that there are a lot of morons running around, I find it hard to believe that some people are so swayed by the idiocy at the foundation of most every argument against gay marriage. So I think you’re right that a lack of empathy is what has so firmly latched some people to this position. That, or an attitude a few steps beyond that, active hatred or disgust. I don’t see how these convictions could be so strong if they weren’t rooted in something deeper.

    You touch upon another thing that drives me nuts about this debate — when it’s dismissed in political discussions as nothing more than a “debate,” a political wedge. So many times I’ve heard politicians say some variant of, “Hey, let’s not get distracted by this — let’s talk about the real issues!” And while I understand what I think they’re trying to say — there are problems of a more immediate, far-reaching nature (e.g. economy, war) — it still rankles, because this question of who can and can’t marry is fundamental. It’s a question of rights, and it’s something we should all take seriously. Yes, even if we think it doesn’t directly impact us. This might sound damned hopelessly naive, but, you know, we are all human, so isn’t that enough to concern us right now?

    Like

    1. This was prompted by the Colorado legislature (the Republican faction) blocking the vote on a civil union rider. It would have consolidated some existing provisions, expanded on the rights of survivorship, and added some legal protection for same sex couples.

      To what I could see, it was a purely secular matter. And you are right . . . in blocking it Republicans accused Democrats of trying to distract from other issues. My answer . . . fool them, and let it pass. I typically vote based on a couple of issues of interest to me, but we are now in the area of basic human rights. Between the gay marriage issue and what I see as an assault on women’s rights, I can’t in all conscience vote for any candidate in the Republican party.

      Given that I have equal antipathy for the Democratic party and the direction they are going, I’m left with either voting for some fringe party, or not vote. Maybe I’ll do a write-in vote . . . Neil Patrick Harris seems as capable a person as any.

      Like

      1. I feel ya regarding this two-party quandary. There’s a few individual politicians I have some confidence in but I cannot really ally myself with any party. And we’ve got our own marriage amendment vote coming up this November — dread the results of that. (Speaking of which, I’m pretty tired of a little organization called “Minnesotans for Marriage [for the Straights!!!]” clogging up my internets with their stupid banner ads, crying “Do you want to let a bunch of radicals define marriage for everyone??!?!” The irony fairly explodes from that question.)

        Like

  2. I believe in gay marriage, not because I want to be your friend, (although I’m fine with that), but because it just makes sense. Why shouldn’t two people who have decided to form a life together have the right to marry? I’m so DONE with all the political / religious / uptight bullshit about this subject. I mentioned this on another blog somewhere, but if you had asked me, (a 53 yr old heterosexual grandma who was married 18 years before becoming a divorced single parent), that the day would come that the subject of gay marriage might be the cornerstone on which I choose my political candidates … well, I would have laughed in your face. But sure enough, eventually the world kept getting more stupid, and I couldn’t just shut up and take it anymore, and now I’ve thrown my voice into the mix, saying that even though I don’t have a personal interest in the outcome, (other than the obvious — if ONE person’s right are being violated, then we ALL should care), these days there is no candidate that would get my vote if they don’t support gay marriage.

    My sister, (a firm Republican who despises all things Obama), tells me that God says being gay is a sin. To her, I argue …. (1) God doesn’t live in your life anywhere else, except when you drag him out to support your anti-gay arguments, so isn’t that hypocritical?, and (2) Unless you’ve sat down knee-to-knee with God and heard it straight from his mouth, are you sure you aren’t just interpreting the words that someone else wrote down as a completely biased mis-quote? How would you feel about your own words being twisted around to support someone else’s argument?

    In many other areas, I consider my sister an intelligent and powerful woman, but when it comes down to the issue of gay rights, I can’t help but view her as pathetically self-delusional. I’m not sure how to reach across the divide of our opposing political views, other than to keep hoping that one day her eyes are opened, and her vote follows. It is amazing to me that karma didn’t deliver a gay child to her doorstep, or perhaps a grandchild. For some people, it isn’t until people are attacking their own blood for being who they are, before their eyes are opened. I wish that otherwise intelligent people could comprehend that being denied basic rights based on sexuality (or religion, or political viewpoint) is just not okay.

    Today, I cast my vote in the right direction, and pray that people wake up. Soon.

    Like

    1. One of the many frustrating things for me is people who refuse to think for themselves, abdicating the responsibility to someone else. Worse yet when that someone else is interpreting a vague and self-contradicting book of fables.

      Just as an illustrative example, I had a very religious friend of whom I asked the simple question of how he knew which timeline in Genesis was the correct one. He came back the next day with a type-written sheet explaining “his opinion” . . . except it was printed out from one of the apologists (!) sites on the web. My next question was “How do you know they have it right?” . . . never got that answer.

      Regardless, it seems clear to me that issues of ethics, morality, human rights, etc. there are many secular sources exploring the application of each from a human perspective, and each is significantly better-suited than the bible as practical guides for people who want to be decent human beings. For one, none I know of tell you to hate people who are different from you.

      Like

    2. “God doesn’t live in your life anywhere else, except when you drag him out to support your anti-gay arguments,”>/i>

      I. Love. This.

      Like

  3. Another blogger puts my feelings better into words. http://wp.me/p1LTjR-r9 I’m no writer, so I’ll use her as my soapbox.

    For the life of me, I cannot understand the practice of denying someone the same “rights” as anyone else (is it a “right” to get married? a privilege? a divine declaration?). Nope. If two people who love and care for one another want to share their lives (and their estate, their kids, their quabbles) then who are we to say they can’t? It’s all about the LAW, as I see it, and about couples getting equal protection (or equal consideration for family healthcare, for instance) from the law. It reeks of Jim Crow laws from darker days past.

    Way to step out, Emilio.

    Like

  4. And regarding “what will the children think” question. My daughter, back when she was five or six, had it figured out. “If two people love each other, why shouldn’t they be able to get married?”

    Yes, that was a Proud Mama moment.

    Like

  5. My daughter is a special ed teacher. She has shared that statistics show the most well adjusted children are the children of a lesbian couple. Just adding that to the mix! I am so sick and tired of people judging others. Let me tell you, if I were to judge, I would be lobbying against heterosexual marriage and men in general! The stories I hear on a daily basis of the abuse women suffered at the hands of their male partners is so horrific and this is better than two same sex people who love each other, what’s this country coming to? I know I was kinda all over the place with this comment, sorry!

    Like

Voice your opinion

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑