Parts of the following was originally written for my previous website in  February of 2004. Unfortunately, it is still pertinent today.

Earlier this month (December 2009) the New York State Senate voted down a bill that would provide marriage equality for same sex and LGBT couples. Yesterday,  the New Jersey State Senate postponed a vote on the same issue. Although not officially sited as the cause, presumably, the votes to pass the measure, simply were not there.

With all the unnecessary time and energy being spent on the issue of same sex marriage/marriage equality of late, I am compelled to comment. I have heard it said from the political arena, that the sanctity of marriage is being threatened, and needs to be protected. That marriage is one of our nations most enduring institutions and must be defined as a union between a man and a woman. I have heard it said from more than one source that same sex marriage defies the laws of God.

I will attempt to address each statement. As for the sanctity of marriage being threatened, I don’t know about anyone else, but for me, I personally feel no threat whatsoever.  I do not live in fear of my marriage falling apart, because two people, who happen to be the same sex, get married. There are those, who given their way, would not allow marriage between different nationalities, races or religions. To me, this is the same thing. It is a civil rights issue, plain and simple. Besides, what right do I, or anyone else for that matter have, to tell someone who to love, or in what way to express that love.

As for marriage being one of our nation’s most enduring institutions, that needs to be defined as a union between a man and a woman. I would almost begin to listen to this argument IF the traditional male/female union was one, that was indeed, lasting and enduring. But, alas, this is not true. One look at divorce stats would tell a much different story. This is simply because the challenges, obstacles and difficulties faced in marriage are the same regardless of the sex of the people in the marriage. Indeed, they are most likely magnified in a same sex union, not because of individuals in the marriage, but the obstacles they must face from outside the marriage. There was at one time  talk of an amendment to the constitution to ban same sex marriage. I seem to remember something about life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now it seems to me that if a person were denied the right to marry, that would put a wee bit of an obstacle in that pursuit.

Now on to same sex marriage being against the laws of God. There are many who will point to one Holy book or another and quote passages that condemn same sex unions. Let me explain it this way.  Its kind of  like playing a game of telephone. Tell someone a story, give them instructions, whatever you like, and have them tell someone else. Do this for a few days and with 40 or 50 people and you will find that whatever the original story was, it will have changed to some degree. Maybe a little, maybe a lot, the possibilities are endless. This is because we all perceive things through our own individual filters of experience and preference. The Holy books that will be quoted were all written thousands of years ago and have undergone who knows how many revisions. Am I saying that everything written in such books are to be discarded, not at all. I am simply questioning accuracy. One look at the sophistication of today’s communication capabilities, such as email, voicemail, cell phones, instant messaging,  and social networking sites easily illustrates my point. Even with all of these devices, we still manage misunderstandings and lack of communication. You can bet the authors of many of our Holy books were not instant messaging, emailing or facebooking pertinent information to each other on a daily basis.

A revisiting of what we consider our Holy books would benefit us greatly, let us expand upon what is contained in them, that works, and detract what does not. Just one example, for me,  a compassionate, kind,  All inclusive and unconditionally loving God, works. A judgmental, condemning and wrathful god, does not.  We have all heard stories of those among us,  that have forgiven others for the most heinous of acts perpetuated against them or their families. Most would agree, that God, the Universe, Life, Source or whatever an individual feels a part of, that is bigger than self, is greater and grander than one individual. So if one individual could forgive the most heinous of acts, how much greater would be the God of our understanding?  I feel if I believe anything less, I truly am, a child of a lesser god.

I have come to ministry to introduce others to an all inclusive, unconditionally loving and non-judgmental God. Well, allow me to introduce you. God does not care how love shows up, or what form it takes. God only cares that it does show up. And yes, “all inclusive” , does include same sex relationships.

So, in closing, should same sex marriage be legal? We all know the answer to this, its really not that hard. I will assist with a little hint, YES!!! 

Thanks for stopping by, join the conversation!

Read the rest of this entry »

It seems that almost daily, news of Tiger Wood’s unfortunate situation worsens. Sadly, it also seems our appetite for information is insatiable. Today brings news of his mother-in-law being rushed to the hospital in the early hours of the morning, (she has since been released) the stress and strain of her daughter’s current difficulties no doubt, a contributing factor.  Why is it so many are so fascinated and engrossed by this story? Although I don’t have, nor could I know,  all the answers to such a question, I will ponder but a few.

Some, no doubt, simply wish to be voyeurs into the lives of the rich and famous. Others, simply wish to be voyeurs into the lives of anybody, which might account for the over abundance of mindless “reality” shows that fill television and cable programing schedules. The more outrageous the character, the bigger the train wreck their life becomes, the deeper the fascination.

Tiger’s current difficulties are nothing new to the human story, he did not do anything that has not already been done. The unfortunate thing about all of it is, that unlike you and I, he is famous and is constantly in the public eye, for better or worse. Tiger is an extremely talented and gifted athlete, as well as a genuinely likable  guy. It is for that reason he is held in the highest regard, placed on a pedestal.  What we need to remember as we follow his family’s difficulties, is that they, just like all of us, are human.

We tend to rush too quickly to judgment, we are swift to demonize the actions of another. Many times,  the actions of another,  are our own thoughts, not acted upon, in some cases, our own deeds, undiscovered. I am not here to condone or excuse Tiger’s behavior, nor am I here to judge or condemn it.  Simply to observe, state what is true for me in this moment and hopefully gain some insight, wisdom and a deeper appreciation of what it means to be human.

I will however, make the following statement on love, relationships and marriage. It is quite possible, and highly likely, that a person would  love or desire more than one individual, in an intimate, romantic relationship. Love is unlimited, we love our family, no matter how big it is. Whether parents, children, cousins, aunts or uncles, we love them all. We love our friends, no matter how many or how few. The only difference is the type of love we have for a particular other and how we express that love. Why would  intimate love of another be limited to one particular individual, once again, love is unlimited. Yes, I know, it is quite a statement, worthy of much deeper and in depth discourse than I will not  go into fully here.

That said, no , I am not promoting that we express our love with whom ever we wish in whatever way we wish. Although I believe it can be done, I know of no one who has done this with any success.  Such a situation could only be achieved with the consent of all parties involved and all involved would surely need to be spiritual masters. I for one, do not fit this definition. I am perfectly happy, to  choose to  express intimate, romantic love, only with my lovely wife Marie and I am very happy, that she has made that same choice.  Key word here, choice. We are always at choice, there are always options.

I had the opportunity some years ago to witness, through the experience of one participant, three very highly evolved individuals enter into a intimate, romantic relationship. All involved were aware and consenting. After some considerable time, it became necessary for two of  individuals to partner exclusively, their bond had blossomed and deepened to that extent. Having witnessed this, leads me to believe, that it would be extremely difficult for most, to maintain intimate relationships with more than one partner.

In closing, may the Woods’  family and all that might be effected by Tiger’s choices, find clarity, understanding, compassion and peace as soon as is possible. May their sadness, frustration, anger and despair be short in both duration and intensity.  Whatever the result, whatever the final decision, whether it be resolution, or dissolution, it can be achieved with kindness, understanding, compassion and love.

Thanks for stopping by, join the conversation!!

Be well, Be peace……