Holy crap, my brother sent me this last night...
I know you're still thinking about it, so I hope you take your time to think of what you should do on your own, but I wanted to share with you an analogy I came up with just to give you something to consider and relate to your own situation. It’s pretty long, but I gave it thought, and just keep in mind it’s just my own thoughts, *not* what you should do per se.
There are both religious, moral, and religious+moral people in the world, and they behave in different ways, yet share similar flaws. Looking at the religious/cultural person, what is right and what is wrong is dependent on what is written in "the book". Personal consideration does not count, and this false "morality" is already written in a book to follow. You can easily see why always strictly following the book is wrong because, let's say eating pork is ALWAYS forbidden, no matter what. Let's say you were stuck on a deserted island with nothing to eat but pigs. The truly devout religious person (priest) would not eat the pork, and while he may have been religiously correct in his actions, the consequence is that he is left starving.
Although it's harder to see, a similar predicament can arise for the devout moral person. Let's say you are the newly elected ruler of a country, and it is the country's long standing belief that criminals should be hanged for their wrongdoing. As a moral person, you believe this is wrong, and you also have every right and power to stop the hanging. Truth is, even in the face of justice, doing what is "right" doesn't rule out the best outcome.
1) Let's say you do what's right, and you stop the hanging. You have every legal right to do so, but as the newly elected ruler, this act doesn't look good at all to a society who has encouraged hanging for generations. Your psyche may be satisfied, the victim might be happy, but you will be looked down upon, disliked, and ostracized by your society. The end result saves you the stress, but hurts the ones around you.
2) Let's say you chose to abide by what is culturally accepted and allow the hanging of criminals. Society has no problem with it, they praise you for being a good ruler, but your psyche is under major stress because you are going against what you personally believe is MORALLY *wrong*. The end result is while the people around you are happy with what you chose to do, you end up hurting yourself.
One might argue that you should do what's best for society (the people around you). There are two things wrong with this view:
-Realistically speaking, one person can only take so much stress, and it isn't fair that you don't follow what you believe.
-This has to stop eventually. It is IMMORAL to kill without giving second chances. For the sake of the betterment of humanity, it has to stop somewhere. Someone has to do it.
Someone has to do it, right, but that act done bluntly and outright won't revolutionize anything, and wouldn’t last as ruler because nobody would like you. Revolutionary choice gone to waste.
Now, I'll pause the analogy and explain how I think this relates to you. You are the ruler of yourself, and you have every legal right to go see Skot, and your parents aren't stopping or forbidding you. You are the ruler.
If you follow option 1), the morally correct path, while your actions are just in every way, there are social consequences that will stay. There will be family tension, there will be stress on your parents, and it could go as far as making them (and yourself especially) look bad in eyes of other family members. So hasty decisions, regardless of moral right, will have some negative consequence on the family.
If you follow option 2), the culturally correct path, you can see why this is bad because while there is no family tension, there is stress because you're rushing your marriage and forced to follow a custom you don't believe in. You're going against your *self* and it's hurting you. Negative consequences on your self.
This is why I believe in realistic situations, the moral choice and religious/cultural choice are both *wrong* in the sense that it will just make things worse for someone, one way or another. The third choice, the decision you should make in my opinion, is the wise choice. The compromise between the two consequences. Some way that will let you live happily, and at least progress the cultural view to something more morally acceptable. The wise choice is really hard to rule out, and I'm guessing that's where you're stuck right now; what to choose so that the least harm is inflicted, and the morally just choice is made and accepted to an extent by the cultural view. It seems like it's one way or another; you go, or you don't. You allow the hanging, or you stop it, but you have to think of some way that will make your parents reconsider their cultural norm and render your choice, while not FULLY acceptable, at least PARTIALLY accepted.
Returning to the analogy for an example, would arguing with the people help at all? Would explaining to them in your best, most sincere and logical reasoning persuade them to allow the banning of hanging and to see that you're only doing what's just? In this case, it won't do much good because it's just been something everyone has accepted for so long, and it's hard to change that massive ideology. People don't want, and will hardly every accept, a drastic change. You need to change their perspective by taking smaller steps. ***Consider that they ARE human, and no matter how culturally inclined they are, *they are still people with morals and feelings*. Maybe you can manipulate that? Maybe that will get them to understand what you are trying to say better.
You decide that, *before deciding* on the hanging, the criminal will go to each person's house, act their best behavior, and do good deeds for every family. Once done, you finally announce that you have chosen not to hang the criminal. Some will still be upset with you. In fact, they may all still be upset to a certain extent. But they have so much less to complain about because the criminal did get punished and society did get a chance to see that he was a nice, sorry person, who did good deeds for them. As human beings, they'll find it at least just a little bit uncomfortable to kill a man like that, even if he was a criminal (even if they don't admit it).
Here, you've created something in psychology what is similar to cognitive dissonance. The dissonance or "lack of harmony" between the culture and moral values clash here. As a cultural person, you want the criminal dead, as a human, you kinda like them. Even if the cultural side is far stronger because it's been around longer, there's the little voice inside their head now telling them to reconsider. Repeat this with many criminals, and in time, this is how the cultural norm will disappear, because THIS, this dissonance of the mind, between the cultural and moral little voices in their head, will get them to think rationally about what SHOULD be done, and why you could be right, in some way.
You can't stop family tension, you're right about that, but you should *try* and find a compromise to satisfy yourself and the family, even if it's tedious and silly (criminals doing community service at everyone's houses!).
You can think of your own ways to alleviate some stress on your parents. Some of my suggestions include having him visit us first, get on good terms with him, and *then* announce that you're going to visit for a while. If you go immediately, it doesn't matter what you argue to everyone, the cultural norm rules out, and there WILL be social conflict and tension between you and your parents, I can almost guarantee that. It could last just that week or they could be upset with you for years, but it will happen. If you wait it out, they'll at least see that you're listening to them for a change and won't be able to call your decision "stubborn" because you let go of your desire and listened to them. If you go after he visits, that's giving them a chance to see him, to show there's nothing to worry about, and if they still disagree, the human side of them will whisper "but it's only fair, what exactly is wrong with this now that you know she's dating a very kind man?". They won't even be able to complain to people outside our family because they know people outside won't see an issue; they'll see this as an acceptable compromise and will find our cultural norm to be weird, senseless and unfair. This dissonance might help alleviate the tension, which is INEVITABLE, but in this way, much less severe.
You can take it a step further and consider something more ridiculous, but acceptable, for the sake of the family. Our parents are only against you sleeping in the same house as him. Maybe you could find a cheap hotel and manage a stay for several nights only, splitting the price between you, Skot, and our parents, so it won't be too expensive. If they, and yourself are up for it, then go for it! Yes it's insanely silly, but you can see it could work, and given the fact that it *is* so ridiculous, think of how embarrassing it would be for our parents as now THEY look like the stubborn ones who won't let go of a cultural norm. This is even stronger dissonance in their mind because it's so much more uncomfortable.
Just consider what YOU want, and what THEY want. If you just want to see where Skot lives and get to know his family and friends, but don’t care where you sleep, and if our parents feel this exact same way, but care ONLY about where you sleep, then find a way to change that ONE factor that’s causing the whole problem. This is where you have to let go of what is “right” for the sake of a better outcome. Don’t change what you believe, but act according to what would be more acceptable if it isn’t too big of a deal. Step back and try to see that the issue really might not be that big, if you just make a compromise. Remember that by choosing any of these alternatives or coming up with your own, you are NOT changing your PERSONAL values. The wise decision retains their personal morality, but their action is *wise* in the sense that it results in the LEAST amount of negative consequences. Moral decisions are for justice, cultural decisions are for behavioral/social acceptance, but wise decisions are for the *best* result, the least harm, the best way to revolutionize or change things for the better.
Just to end it now, you need to either change your own perspective, or you need to change theirs. I don't mean to criticize either of you, but they're like religious closed-minded priest that only accepts what "has been" for so long, and you're like a feminist/social movement/etc who fights for her right, for what is JUSTICE, who will only accept that which is just and fair. (Sorry for the really extreme metaphors, I just want you to get an idea of what I'm trying to say). Someone needs to turn around and change their perspective. That's how the best can come out of this, and it's the only way justice can be brought in a more permanent state. I already told you that a few generations form now this cultural norm will be gone. While unfortunate, you have to live with what is today and find a way around it, and avoid hasty decisions that *would* make you look like a revolutionist, but a *bad* one in the eyes of the culturally fixated. My advice is just that; make a wise decision and compromise. Both groups get hurt, but at least they can heal afterwards, slowly, but surely.
Your decision is entirely your own and I won't judge you for whatever you end up choosing, please don't worry at all about me or what I'll think! This is just to get you thinking, not deciding. Good luck with you decision! Goodnight!
He pretty much wrote a fucking essay about his views on my situation, but this is why I love him <3
Topic: on the edge..