OK, now that I have had to look at the picture of Rosie O'Donnell kissing her new wife? / husband? / whatever, I have to say one thing right off the bat. I can't believe that the same marriage I have to my wife, is anything like what they appear to want to have. One of the main problems with the reappearance of their picture, is that most of the major news and portal websites have the picture plastered on their front page so I have no choice but to see it over, and over, and over, and over (etc) again.
As of today, and right now, I offically consider the whole marriage thing crap. Not just for gays and lesbians, but for hetros too. If you want to get "married", (in this case) it no longer anything more than a sex license. Nothing more. Once you get a "marriage license", you can then legally commit (in the privacy of your own home, currently) illegal acts of sodomy.
Merriam-Webster's online dictionary defines "sodomy as:So, in my way of thinking, you can no longer arrest individuals who are (theoretically) "legally married", because you would be infringing on their rights. The Fourth Amendment protects private citizens from unnecessary search and seizure, and that means you can't peek in the window of a (theoretically) "legally married" couple to charge them with doing what they are licensed to do.Sodomy: Middle English, from Old French sodomie, from Late Latin Sodoma Sodom; from the homosexual proclivities of the men of the city in Gen 19:1-11 1 : copulation with a member of the same sex or with an animal, 2 : noncoital and especially anal or oral copulation with a member of the opposite sex,
The beginning of the second paragraph of the Decleration of Independence states: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Not that I think we should impose on anyone's happiness, but lets get real.IMHO, means breeding no longer can be associated with marriage, but sodomy can. From this point forward, I will have to consider anyone who are not capable of producing a child (without outside intervetion or the help of a friend) as not married. It will not matter (in my eyes) if they are married in a courthouse, a church, a ship at sea, or anywhere else.
IMHO, the term "marriage" is no longer valid. It no longer means (in this country) what is originally intended. A dyad or breeding couple.
Sorry folks, Melissa Etherridge and her wife? / husband? / whatever, does not count. I can pretty much guarantee that those two women did not naturally produce one single sperm to fertilize that egg. It was in the news. They had a "friend" do it. Isn't that sweet of him to do that for them?What this really means when you burrow down through the apparent garbage that clouds most peoples minds, is that the tax laws need to change. Specifically to remove any involvement between two legally "married" people. This would require everyone has to pay the same amount of taxes, whether your "married" or not. Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Taxes are a whole-nother issue. (Hey, It is my article, so I make up the words I want as I go)On top of that, think of the enormous amount of tax dollars that would be saved in removing the marriage licensing, blood tests, paperwork and all the other assorted red-tape the government has it's nose into. Just this cost savings alone could justify the disillusion of "legal marriage" in the US. I wrote about this back on Friday, August 15, 2003, and no one bothered to comment then (and I was really hoping for someone to comment).
One of the mistakes people are making is that this is not 'gay-bashing'. Matter of fact, it is only about marriage and how I feel it is unfair that an institution as old as written history is being erased. I just am seeing this as taking away what my parents and grandparents thought was a serious part of life. Now liberal society is turning it into a farce or an excuse to get laid.
No comments:
Post a Comment