All of you!
And… it’s disgusting!
In fact, if you fall on Either Side of this issue… You’re a Fool! You are literally being Foolish… like Clowns… in your thinking.
OK, I know most of the time writers will make at least a small attempt not to offend the three people who read their crap. So, if you’re still reading this you might be asking yourself why I have decided to insult you. Because I am.
The reason here is that all of you have fallen for a faulty premise when choosing any position on Gay Marriage and it disgusts me… you disgust me.
All of you believe that I should be forced to continue pleading upon bended knee, with money and blood test in hand, before some bureaucrat in order for them to decide whether to sanction MY MARRIAGE.
In other words, All of YOU think The Government should continue to have a Right to tell me who I Can and Cannot Marry.
I don’t care if you’re Black, White, Green, Gay, Crooked, Lofty or Two Feet Tall… the idea that any of you would want to perpetuate a system where the Government controls who you can marry makes me want to puke. And, it should make you want to puke too. It’s a hold over from the “Good Ole Days” when “certain families” and “certain races” should not be permitted to marry. So… seriously? You like this idea? Any of you!?
And this “Gay Rights” crap… There are NO GAY RIGHTS as there are NO NON-GAY RIGHTS. There are ONLY INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS which must be protected and defended.
It is Disgusting. You are Disgusting.
Good… now that I have both made you angry and gained some support, let me put it in the simplest terms.
The Federal Government should have exactly Nothing to say about marriage. Nothing.
If the States want to do stupid things, those things are reserved to them for the doing… but they should also have exactly nothing to say about marriage.
A marriage is between you and your church. Period.
If you want a binding contract, Civil Union is available to all of us. Contract Law provides for all of us who find it important to codify our relationships. And many of us do. (Don’t forget Common Law too… it takes over in many States. States. The States…)
Which brings me to another problem… marriage, while a genuinely valuable institution, should not be codified into the Federal Tax law.
I hear the Gasps!
“But Marriage is a Sacred Institution!”
Yes it is. And, I can certainly make a cogent argument as to why an expanding population is historically healthy for Nation States as well as why it is imperative to support the Private Enterprise of rearing children which a “marriage” supports. But it doesn’t change the fact that Federal Government should be Silent on this issue.
And besides, Cultural Institutions are kept that way by the population that nurtures such traditions. That does not mean “Turns them into Law.” We can play the ‘Non-codified” cultural institution game beginning with Christmas and Moving through the Fourth of July all the way to Thanksgiving, Birthdays and Baptisms but if you’re not tracking with me at this point you either to need to set this post down for a while and come back to it or stop reading… as it must be torture.
Again… the Federal Government’s “say” should be exactly what is contained between the following parenthesis regarding marriage: ( ).
Let me remind all of you… just because we have done it for “a long time” doesn’t mean it’s right.
“But, but, but… tons of law will have to be re-written!”
Yep.
Is that it? Is that all you got? Frankly, most laws should be removed from our books in my opinion. A majority of them are nuisance laws, never enforced or specifically created to favor some politician’s buddy. Wouldn’t it be a terrific world if we all focused our debates on what laws to get rid of instead of what new laws to create? Say for every “new” law two “old” ones have to go…
Anyway, I hammered this out because it’s timely and it is basically what I’m going to be screaming at the Television for the duration of the Supreme Court hearings on Hollingsworth vs. Perry and The United States Vs. Windsor.
Let’s all try to stop being Foolish in all Things.
makeaneffort 
March 26th, 2013 at 9:34 am
I think it is a great idea to throw out a law when a new one is imposed. I totally get what you are saying here, but I think the whole gay rights to marriage is just about being recognized as a valid marriage. In the military a spouse has rights to benefits under the military member (this gets back to your point about the government staying out of marriage period but…) As far as I know a spouse is still only someone of the opposite sex. The military will fund a move, surgery, etc for a spouse of the opposite sex – and by spouse I of course mean a bonafide legal marriage. Well, i think you get my point. But it is this example I always come back to when I start to get tired of the whole gay rights to marriage, because I don’t care who marry’s who, but until we can get those entities that are in control to feel the same way it will be an issue that needs to be addressed.
LikeLike
March 26th, 2013 at 11:22 am
The Military is subject to Contract Law just as any other institution. In fact, their entire paradigm is built on Contract Law. That being said… Until we ALL get our minds around what Individual Rights really means… no one will challenge the gender discrimination individuals experience, certainly no the military… or the IRS for that matter. As I pointed out, Will there be a need to re-write a number of laws? Yes. There will be. If anything, laws descriminating due to gender are discriminatory against the individual… not specifically homosexuals, asexuals, trans gender curious sexuals, or whatever subgroup you came come up with.
I agree with you regarding the need to challenge the control certain entities exercise… but I care little about how anyone “feels” about things. I prefer they “think” about things. – Good to hear from you Pout.
LikeLike
March 26th, 2013 at 11:45 am
Pout, I just thought about another reason that not just the Military, but the Federal Government as a whole is not genuinely interested in addressing the benefits issue. Should the ability to “assign” the receipient in regard to benefits would be a HUGE financial problem for the Government. Much of the accounting relies on the fact that a spouse either does not exist or dies at some point which terminates taxpayer funded benefits. Addressing this would force all of us to re-visit Socialist Schemes like Social Security etc. There is much to this in regard to how deeply we have enatngled ourselves with this particular Individual Discrimination.
LikeLike
March 26th, 2013 at 9:26 am
marriage is a decision you make every single morning. should i stay or should i go. is this working for me or not. does this matter to me or not.
never have i needed to call the federal government to get those questions answered.
(but people can get hurt financially) yes they can, that’s why the STATES have laws to protects us.
LikeLike
March 26th, 2013 at 11:13 am
States have Contract Law which protects us as Individuals. Thus… a Marriage Contract. If one is absent, Common Law, in some States, creates one by default.
LikeLike
March 26th, 2013 at 5:25 pm
But, Common law marriage only protects heterosexuals by default. And I don’t think all states recognize common law marriage and we all know many states do not recognize a gay marriage at all. You are right though, we need to forget about how we FEEL and get our minds around what individual freedom IS.
While the military does function under contract law, it is unique in that they have their own set of rules they play by, the UCMJ, which I guess is a contract, but I can’t think of any other institution that has its own set of rules set out quite like this. Plus, the military is still a Government institution funded by tax payers, not quite the same as a private institution.
LikeLike