Gay Marriage

Facebook has some fucking little red and white thingy that you can replace as your FB profile pic to show your support for gay marriage.  Yeah that always works.  I’m sure the nine fucktards called the SCOTUS will base their decision on a bunch of FBtards changing their pic.  Once again, sensitivity over substance.  Yeah, that’ll work.

I sent a tweet to Tammy Bruce regarding this subject and she took me to task (Update) on her show.  My take is that once you allow gay marriage then it will spread into the religious side.  Once you have a right you expand it and the next logical step will be to force churches to perform marriages.  Oh, but the First Amendment prohibits that.  Yeah, like the Bill of Rights has ever stopped the ProgNazis.

But as for gays and lesbians getting married in a civil ceremony, go for it, get fucking married.  I don’t give a flying pig shit what you do in your bedroom and I don’t think many others do either truth be told.  I hope to hell you all get married.  But don’t come crying to us after you end up standing there in a pool of blood because your excretory tract looks like it has been ripped out by a crazed honey badger hopped up on speed balls wearing a spike studded gimp suit.  You wanna get fucking married?  Get fucking married so you can enjoy the all fucking privileges we heterosexuals have been enjoying for centuries.  Enjoy it now because eventually I’ll be the one in the back row with a 1000oz Coke, hot wings and a seven gallon bucket of overly buttered and salted popcorn laughing my ass off.  Again, don’t come crawling to us when you finally realize that there is only one fucking group that really gives a shit whether or not you dumb fucks get married.

Oh, where am I going to find this entertainment?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In divorce court…

34 comments

  1. 1
    LC Xealot growls and barks:

    There are three ways to look at an issue: Fuck Yes! Hell No! And… I don’t give a flying fuck.

    Chalk me up to the latter on gay marriage. I don’t care. It’s not my issue, but as an individual rights thing I am vaguely in favor of allowing it… and honestly, if you really think the government is oppressing your marriage rights… why are they asking their oppressors for their blessing anyway? Why aren’t they saying “get the government out of marriage” instead of their current view on it, which seems to be “wait for the Supreme Court to say it’s OK.”

    And yes, this “show solidarity by posting a pithy facebook pic” idea is just idiotic. Nobody cares about your profile pictures.

    Lastly… if they force people who are unwilling to perform gay marriages to do so by some sort of government fiat, that’s about the time the Constitution will be printed on all government-approved rolls of toilet paper. But… at this rate it will probably happen.

  2. 2
    Emperor Misha I growls and barks:

    Oh Brother, am I with you or what?

    I’ve said it so many times that I just don’t care to repeat it anymore, but I really see no reason why same sex couples shouldn’t be allowed to enjoy all of the same “benefits” that married couples do if they so desire. I do not care, nor have I ever cared, what they enjoy in the privacy of their own homes, it doesn’t even make a difference as to how I view them as human beings, friends, coworkers, you name it. It’s between them and G-d and He doesn’t need my interference, being omnipotent and all that. Not to mention that their choice in this matter neither breaks my bones nor picks my pocket.

    In short: IT IS NONE OF MY FUCKING BUSINESS AND I LIKE IT THAT WAY.

    The only objection I have and have always had is that they cannot call it “marriage.” Marriage has a meaning, it has had that meaning for thousands of years, and I don’t much like it when fuckheads go about changing the meaning of words. Much like I don’t like the fact that “racist” is a meaningless word now, thanks to the actions of ProgNazi fuckheads who have successfully turned it into a word which means “somebody who isn’t a ProgNazi”, which is what every sentient organism on this planet should strive to be or, failing that, hopefully die immediately.

    ACTUAL racists still walk among us and they, too, ought to drop fucking dead this very second to save precious oxygen from going to waste but, thanks to ProgNazis, we no longer have a term to label them in an unambiguous way.

    Gays can call their non-marriages “civil unions”, “gaycouples”, “boobledick” or whatever the fuck they want, I don’t, honestly and truthfully, give a flying fuck, but they cannot call it “marriage.”

    And the fact that millions of us supposedly “homophobic” (again, a word that only means “somebody who isn’t a ProgNazi” these days, thanks to the ProgNazis violent, aggressive rape of the English language) “haters” have offered the loud-mouthed 0.001% of the gay community the option of getting all of the “benefits” of marriage as long as they don’t call it “marriage” only proves definitively that just being allowed to live together as couples in the eyes of the law was never, EVER their REAL goal.

    So fuck them.

    (Oh, and as an afterthought regarding the current bullshit SCROTUS deliberations: I hope they strike DOMA down. It’s a State’s issue as nowhere in the Constitution does it grant the federal government the authority to define “marriage.” As far as Prop 8 goes, they have absolutely no authority there. That’s a State decision and all fucking nine of them deserve to hang by sunset if they as much as THINK about touching it.)

  3. 3
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    “I’m sure the nine fucktards called the SCOTUS will base their decision on a bunch of FBtards changing their pic. Once again, sensitivity over substance. Yeah, that’ll work.”

    It might. Brown v. Board of Education was decided in part because kids viewed black dolls as “bad,” and white dolls as “good.” If the majority of the Court is casting around, looking for something to base an opinion on, they might just grab onto something that stupid.

  4. 4
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    Again, don’t come crawling to us when you finally realize that there is only one fucking group that really gives a shit whether or not you dumb fucks get married.

    With all due respect, Infidel, there are two groups.
    – Hassan bin Layyed, your friendly neighborhood jihadist.

  5. 5
    LC Light29ID growls and barks:

    Fa Cube Itches @ #:

    And not 3000 years of law called the Old and New Testament and Judeo-Christian precedent? Oh, wait, sorry. What the fuck was I thinking????

  6. 6
    mrzee growls and barks:

    Here in Canada, the government hasn’t forced the churches to perform gay marriages but a couple of Justices have been fired for refusing to perform civil gay marriages because it offended their religious beliefs. There was also a case where a church-owned hall was sued and lost for refusing to rent to a lesbian couple for their wedding.

    I’m still waiting to find out what will happen when two brothers or sisters decide to marry.

  7. 7
    HempRopeAndStreetlight growls and barks:

    I don’t give two shits what people do with one another. If they start trying to force churches to give these fuckers weddings then I will very quickly start to give a shit in a very dangerously negative way. If the church wants to willingly make a mockery of itself, fine, what the fuck ever. Blaspheme away. bitches. I’d leave any such church, but they can do whatever they like.

    But my fear is the feds will be standing there like chicken hawks forcing churches to hitch these people under pain of loosing their tax exempt status.

    That shit happens even once, even mother fucking once, and it’s game the fuck on, and the first convenient walking government employed target I can immediately get at just received the pleasure of being the damned honor guard meeting me at the rainbow bridge.

  8. 8
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    LC Light29ID @ #:

    And not 3000 years of law called the Old and New Testament and Judeo-Christian precedent? Oh, wait, sorry. What the fuck was I thinking????

    See, you clearly lack the judicial temperament of a Wise Latina :em01:

  9. 9
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    HempRopeAndStreetlight @ #:

    But my fear is the feds will be standing there like chicken hawks

    No pun intended, of course….

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chicken+hawk

  10. 10
    LC Guy S growls and barks:

    I was going to post something along these very same lines. LC Light has beaten me to the punch!

    And at the end of the day, that is what bothers me about this whole kurfluffle. Not that other than traditional hetero couples want to “tie the knot”, or that they want the same legal standings other couples receive. I don’t know of anyone who would have any real objection to this.

    No, what bothers me the most is the agenda(s) hidden or otherwise, which aim to destroy in one fashion or another all other ethos which call theirs into question.

    Oh, and if one more group advocates for what they incorrectly perceive as “their rights”, when in reality, they have far more sinister goals in mind, I think I will no longer be responsible for my actions.

  11. 11
    LC hilljohnny growls and barks:

    LC Guy S says:

    “their rights”,

    there is the problem. people believing marriage is a right. a guy meeting a girl, falling in love, finds she is his twin sister seperated at birth when their mother gave them up for adoption. no right to marry.

  12. 12
    LC Draco growls and barks:

    This whole homosexual marriage thing pisses me off to no end. I lost one of my best friends last year to prostrate cancer and he and his partner were never allowed to get the same allowances as a married couple. Before he died, we had a LONG discussion about how the heterosexual and homosexual cultures view each other. He once said, (to paraphrase)…”.our sexual desires may be different, but we still want to be with someone (a partner) who understands and loves us. It’s not a acceptance..it’s about understanding.” I will love that man til the day I die.

    They NEVER tried to influence or change how my wife and I felt about homosexuals. Hell, in 10th Group one of my best friends was black AND a homosexual. And most people knew it…it did it keep me from having his back in a bar fight or guys trying to jump him? Fuck no…

    And this will get me hate emails….I talked to Deej about religious issues….I have been exposed, studied and researched everything from Yazidi to Sunni to Shia’ (to include Khomeini’s Little Green Book), I have read the Koran in English (Although a Muslim will tell you it doesn’t count..), Shinto, Christianity in it’s many forms, Buddhism and many Native and Tribal religions. I have gone from Agnostic to a Buddhist…back to an Agnostic to a Wiccan. (I was NEVER an Atheist!!!)

    If you are a Christian…great, I was one. I still have a lot respect (heck, my eyes got misty when the new Pope was elected), and many of Christianity’s symbolism comes from Paganism. (Yuletide and the Christmas Tree anyone?) But I NEVER thrust my beliefs on anyone. (Grammar Czar will probably defriend me on Facebook again..I still love you, Ma’am)

    I have known MANY homosexuals, and like heterosexuals, they just wanted to be left alone and live their lives. I do not care what consenting adults due behind their closed doors….just don not force your beliefs on me . (HELLO, Islam!!)

    I will just end it with what Shepherd Book said to Mal….”I don’t care what you believe….just believe it.”

  13. 13
    Slightly to the right of Gingis Khan growls and barks:

    I just want the state out of marriage completely. Let marriage be defined by whatever religious group you choose to be a part of. Anything else give the government way too much say in something they should not be sticking their nose in. From the governments point of view a spouse should be nothing more than a person who can make decisions for you when you are unconscious.

    However if we’re going to have the state bless our unions with a license then give everyone equal shake.

  14. 14
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    I’m of the mindd that govt should have nothing to do with marriage. As I see it marriage is for a cbhurch to decide. I think we should all go to a court house and register our civil unions. After that if someone wants to find a church that will marry them, that’s between them and the church.

    My problem with the current place we find ourselves is that I don’t think this is about marriage. I think this has more to do about validation and acceptance. I think this is just a ploy to have society validate their abnormality as somehow normal or ok. As a rule I don’t screw around with people because they are different, but I refuse to accept homosexuals as “normal.” I find the whole concept of a man looking at anothers mans asshole and a) wanting to put his penis there, and b) calling that desire love, to be decidely abnormal.

  15. 15
    LC Light29ID growls and barks:

    Unfortunately, marriage is one place that the gubmint has to have a place. Marriage is two parts; one is the covenant with God that you will love, honor and cherish this person until death do you part. The other part…the cold, hard part is that marriage is also a contract between two parties and when the parties break up then it’s up the courts (i.e. the state) to determine who gets what. This part had to be put in place because the alternative wasn’t conducive to ones continued well-being, just ask any of Henry VIII wives. Even the English got a little tired of the Kings idea of divorce proceedings. When he couldn’t get an annulment from the Pope; he simply had her charged with treason, chopped off her head on Tower Hill then ran off and married the next one before the body was even cold. So they took the act of marriage and split it into two parts.

    This is why the blood sucking parasites’ (lawyers) want gay marriage. Thanks to Obongo the Kenyan Klingon Fuckers™ wonderful economy run on Skittles and Unicorn farts the divorce rate has fallen dramatically. Why? Because couples, especially with kids, know that if they did get divorced they would all be on the street starving. Congrats Obongo, you’ve managed to do what the church couldn’t, keep people together. So you go find another demographic that you can suck dry…gays (no pun intended, really). Gays proportionally have higher incomes, higher disposable income and lower debt to income ratios so if you get them to marry, knowing that in 6, 12, 18 months (maybe longer), some of these couples are going to call it quits. Then what happens? Because now you have a marriage license (i.e. a contract) you get to go to court and fight it out all the while the lawyers are trying to decide between the Mercedes or the BMW for Christmas because YOUR GOING TO PAY FOR IT.

    As that officer told Gunny Highway:

    Be careful what you wish for Gunny, you just might get it.

  16. 16

    LC Draco says:

    This whole homosexual marriage thing pisses me off to no end. I lost one of my best friends last year to prostrate cancer and he and his partner were never allowed to get the same allowances as a married couple. Before he died, we had a LONG discussion about how the heterosexual and homosexual cultures view each other. He once said, (to paraphrase)…”.our sexual desires may be different, but we still want to be with someone (a partner) who understands and loves us. It’s not a acceptance..it’s about understanding.” I will love that man til the day I die.
    They NEVER tried to influence or change how my wife and I felt about homosexuals. Hell, in 10th Group one of my best friends was black AND a homosexual. And most people knew it…it did it keep me from having his back in a bar fight or guys trying to jump him? Fuck no…
    And this will get me hate emails….I talked to Deej about religious issues….I have been exposed, studied and researched everything from Yazidi to Sunni to Shia’ (to include Khomeini’s Little Green Book), I have read the Koran in English (Although a Muslim will tell you it doesn’t count..), Shinto, Christianity in it’s many forms, Buddhism and many Native and Tribal religions. I have gone from Agnostic to a Buddhist…back to an Agnostic to a Wiccan. (I was NEVER an Atheist!!!)
    If you are a Christian…great, I was one. I still have a lot respect (heck, my eyes got misty when the new Pope was elected), and many of Christianity’s symbolism comes from Paganism. (Yuletide and the Christmas Tree anyone?) But I NEVER thrust my beliefs on anyone. (Grammar Czar will probably defriend me on Facebook again..I still love you, Ma’am)
    I have known MANY homosexuals, and like heterosexuals, they just wanted to be left alone and live their lives. I do not care what consenting adults due behind their closed doors….just don not force your beliefs on me . (HELLO, Islam!!)
    I will just end it with what Shepherd Book said to Mal….”I don’t care what you believe….just believe it.”
    LC Draco recently posted..Heroes Honored

    I ***HEART*** you! In the most platonic way possible! :em01:

  17. 17
    LC TerribleTroy growls and barks:

    See L29 that’s where we disagree. In my mind the marriage is between me, my spouse, and god. It is a covenant with god. All the other stuff (property rights, etc) is irrelevant. If society wants to promote or support the creation of families by provoding incentives, or recognitions, then (imo) there should be a seperate legal contract. Who is the govt to decide who is no longer married in the eyes of god? Think about it, a preacher binds you but only a judge can seperate you? One enters voluntarily but has to be permitted to exit?

  18. 18
  19. 19
    LC Draco growls and barks:

    Damn my typos….I had just come back from a Hockey game, was a little ‘light headed’, typing from my heart and I was typing on a GD govn’t computer with a touchpad that makes me want to put a stake in it.

    Grammar Czar…please forgive me!! (prostrate -> prostate…and other typos!)

    :em06:

  20. 20
    Erbo growls and barks:

    LC Light29ID says:

    Unfortunately, marriage is one place that the gubmint has to have a place. Marriage is two parts; one is the covenant with God that you will love, honor and cherish this person until death do you part. The other part…the cold, hard part is that marriage is also a contract between two parties and when the parties break up then it’s up the courts (i.e. the state) to determine who gets what. This part had to be put in place because the alternative wasn’t conducive to ones continued well-being, just ask any of Henry VIII wives. Even the English got a little tired of the Kings idea of divorce proceedings. When he couldn’t get an annulment from the Pope; he simply had her charged with treason, chopped off her head on Tower Hill then ran off and married the next one before the body was even cold. So they took the act of marriage and split it into two parts

    In Europe there are actually two parts to it. When my ex-wife married her present husband in Finland, they had a civil ceremony followed by a church wedding. (I’ve seen the pictures of both.) Those two parts have just been conflated here in the U.S., and I don’t think they should be. I say, get the government out of the business of “marriage.” Replace it at that level, if you must, with registered domestic support contracts, with their terms enforceable under contract law. If you want to get married, then go see a priest or religious officiant of your choice.

    By the way, the first laws that government passed that had anything to do with marriage were for the prohibition of interracial marriages…a purpose which, I’m sure we all realize today, is thoroughly bogus.

  21. 21
    LC Xealot growls and barks:

    The government doesn’t need to be directly involved in marriage. It can simply enforce, through the existing justice system, a contract drawn between two consenting parties. Simply have a notarized contract drawn up dealing with the division of assets and such in the event the contract is terminated by one or more parties. In other words pre-nups would simply become standard practice for the legal aspects of marriage. It’d certainly make divorces a lot more simplistic and deprive the Divorce Lawyers of their lucrative (but somewhat fucked-up) business.

  22. 22
    LC Spare Parts growls and barks:

    Where’s the !0th Amendment when we need it? Legally that’s the venue for this issue. But that’s not what the plaintiffs in the SCOTUS case Want. They demand an irrevocable sanction for Their Behavior. I’m a bachelor to the end because I decided normal middle class people had no chance of becoming Independent the day JFK was murdered. This was cemented in ’68 when Sheriff Woods failed to open up on the filthy hippies who Now run Our lives. Most people have only now taken notice, so the country is too far gone. Chief Justice Roberts remarks from the Supreme Bench doth portend what is to come. Failure to give deference and admiration to Perverts will hence forward be a Felony. That’s Their bottom line; (bad pun;bad.) We will be compelled to like them or else.
    So they get married. Fine on one condition. The word “Man” must be prohibited from being uttered in Their ceremonies, since No Pervert can be One. Let them be pronounced Poker and Pokee, or Plug and Socket. Bi’s can be Middlesexuals along with many residents of suburban Boston.
    And there will be No reversal of any Leftist diktat until there is nothing of any value for Them to take and nothing more to lose leaves Conservatives with no Other choice but fighting to restore Morality as we once lived under it. Let it come.

  23. 23
    LC Xealot growls and barks:

    I partly agree with Spare Parts. Now, I believe people can do whatever silly or perverted shit they want to, provided it’s consensual and all that. But at the same time, there IS a cultural decay present in our society. Homosexuality has been around as far back as recorded history goes, and doubtless it will continue to exist for the foreseeable future. Yet today there is a push for this to be recognized as normal or even morally superior to heterosexuality. That -IS- a new development.

    The destruction of the Constitution began they day after it was ratified. The Founders bought us time… subverting the Constitution has not been an easy task for the other side, it has taken over 200 years to achieve, and had to be done with incredible slowness. But we are reaching a critical turning point now. The decay has accelerated. Our culture has balkanized, our politics have polarized and there hasn’t been division like this EVER in American history. Even the division before the Civil War cannot compare to it.

    Advancing technology has kept the quality of life improving, where if this were any other time in human history, the country would already be destroyed. But we’ve reached a point where even that isn’t enough to sustain us anymore. Shit is going to get very ugly, very soon. And the victicrats are about to find out what being a REAL victim looks like.

  24. 24
    LC/IB PrimEviL growls and barks:

    So where’s the flaunted ‘separation of Church and State’ now? A Holy Sacrament of the Church is now conflated
    as a ‘Right’ under Government control.

    Control…there’s the rub. It’s not about marriage, it’s about Control; as it always is with the ProgNazis, along with
    undermining and corrupting all traditional mores.

  25. 25
    Eric Praline growls and barks:

    Long time lurker here, but I felt I needed to get something off my chest vis-a-vis churches being forced to marry gay couples. I’m having a hard time finding any sympathy for a lot of them. Many churches, including the Catholic Church, have spent the better part of a century throwing all of their moral weight behind getting ProgNazi politicians elected (to help the poor dontcha know). I understand it’s the Bill of Rights at stake, but where were these holy men when the Feds were taking up to 75% of our income before Ronnie got to DC? Where’s their outrage now that the Feds are taking 55% of our estates when we die? Where are the churchmen every time a creature like Diane Frankenfeinstein tries to take away our 2nd Amendment rights (hint: they’re usually on the stage right next to said creature.)? They’re nowhere to be found when our God given rights are being violated, but now that they’re affected they’re crying foul. When the day comes I’ll stand with religious liberty, but for the sake of The Constitution. Until then, I say let them twist in the wind.

  26. 26
    Library Czar growls and barks:

    I say let the gays marry. They have the same right to be as miserable as the rest of us.

  27. 27
    Tallulah growls and barks:

    People, people, People! this is NOT ABOUT GAYS GETTING “MARRIED.”

    It’s about ATTACKING CHRISTIANITY.

    Please watch this clip: this is what has happened in Canada, which legalized homosexual marriage a few short years ago.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=AkvAIMrNnqA

    Be warned. The persecution of Christians there, the use of this issue by the STATE as a battering ram to break down our home’s sanctuary and force us to teach our children what we don’t believe, THAT’s what’s on the table. That’s what’s at stake.

    Please heed Manning’s warning.

  28. 28
    Tallulah growls and barks:

    Well, there’s James Stuart and Donna Reed in “It’s a Wonderful Life.”

    And then there’s this (utterly NSFW; no one under 18 allowed to click through): http://www.zombietime.com/up_your_alley_2008/

    Just so you know what they’re teaching our kids.

  29. 29
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Putin orders ban on adoptions by foreign same-sex couples – report

    How sad when Putin has more sense than the MORON in the White House

  30. 30

    No, what bothers me the most is the agenda(s) hidden or otherwise, which aim to destroy in one fashion or another all other ethos which call theirs into question.

    We have a winnah!

    They had civil unions here in Washington, which conferred every benefit the state could confer onto marriage onto civil unions.

    It wasn’t enough. I’m sure that I would disagree with probably more than a few of you about why that is, but when it turns into a single minded obsession to redefine a term which has had a precise legal meaning in western civilization for no new net legal benefit resulting, one should be suspicous of the reasons for such a crusade. And when it is characterized as a “Constitutional Right” when it institutionalizes something that was illegal as little as ten years ago, and had been one of the original felonies in our long legal tradition, I get even more suspicious.

    As for the desire to “remove government from marriage altogether”, I can tell you that you’re trying to unscramble eggs.

    The Federal government confers certain benefits and responsibilities based on marital status, whether it is benefits for dependents, or determining beneficiaries for your Thrift Savings Plan. As such, it has an interest in defining what that relationship is and is not. The alternative is a “take it as you find it” situation with those relationships, which would not only create an enormous expense in having to deal with what is and is not a “marriage”, but would almost certainly, at some point, involve government recognition of some union that would offend and repulse even the staunchest libertarian.

    However, even at the state level, saying that the government should get out of marriage altogether because it is a contract is shockingly naive.

    The government regulates all kinds of associations and relationships by offering benefits in exchange for its official sanction of these relationships. It does so to create certainty. It does so because there is a perceived benefit to society for doing so, and because it wants to foster certain outcomes, and it incentivizes those outcomes by offering benefits to go with that sanction. The government regulates who may do business as a corporation or a limited liability company or limited partnership. it imposes conditions, and in exchange for that, and annual payment and reporting, it offers the benefit of limited liability for corporate acts. It allows non-profits corporations to exist in order to confer benefits on society that government shouldn’t be performing, or cannot perform in an efficient manner. It even limits marriage based on the perceived value to society, which is why you cannot marry your sister/brother, children, parents, or first cousin. And even today (some might even say ESPECIALLY today) with the expansion of out of wedlock births, there is still great benefit to society in marriage (I don’t say “traditional”, because it confers a legitimacy on “gay” marriage that it simply doesn’t deserve). And in matters of state law, marriage impacts questions of parentage, child support, welfare, student aid, estate and probate law, community property, and on and on and on. It isn’t simply a contract between two people. It affects agency law, secured transactions, property rights, and issues of tort liability. Legally speaking, it is a building block of society and a component of law in areas of life that some people may never personally encounter, and however impolitic or politically incorrect it may be to say so, the same cannot be said for “gay” marriage.

    *dons flameproof suit*

    Bring it.

  31. 31
    Fa Cube Itches growls and barks:

    Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere @ #:

    Just wondering when and how the homosexual community got all into the idea of marriage. It wasn’t that long ago that they were complaining about the evil “breeders” trying to force our overly-rigid morality on them. Pretty big change of heart in less than 15 years or so.

  32. 32
    LC George, Apocryphal Prophet growls and barks:

    I’d like to see what happens if gay marriage is allowed on the condition that we also abolish no-fault divorce.

  33. 33
    Kristophr, LC growls and barks:

    I think the protection of marriage act was probably a mistake.

    What was really needed was a protection of churches act.

    One forbidding any government from requiring a religious organization to pay for things they abhor, or to perform ceremonies for people they don’t want to.

    Instead of treading on something that is a state issue, they should have stuck to protecting first amendment rights.

  34. 34
    LC Gladiator growls and barks:

    Five arguments against gay marriage: Society must brace for corrosive change
    By Seth Forman

    Putting gay unions on a legal par with heterosexual ones may radically alter our culture.

    New York State, the media report with poorly disguised elation, is set to legally redefine marriage to include relationships between two same-sex adults.

    Before this happens, people of good conscience, supporters and opponents both, should at least be given the opportunity to consider the possible consequences.

    1. Religious freedom. Proponents of gay marriage think their view is the latest expression of enlightened humanitarianism. That means people who believe in the sanctity of traditional marriage may soon wind up on the wrong side of “enlightened” bigotry.

    A recent Newsday editorial said opponents “will be seen by future generations in much the same light as those who opposed school desegregation.” Devout Catholics, Orthodox Jews and, ironically, the 70% of African-Americans who oppose gay marriage have become the new Ku Klux Klan?

    Proponents of gay marriage insist that a “religious exemption” will be sufficient to protect the rights of faith-based traditionalists. Maybe, maybe not.

    2. Rights of children. Legal equality for gay marriage will mean there can be no discrimination in favor of heterosexual couples in any sphere, including adoption, custody and reproductive services. Social workers showing preference to heterosexual couples in foster care or adoption placement will lose their jobs or face lawsuits.

    More children living in gay homes means more children living lives absent a relationship with at least one biological parent. One needn’t deny the existence of many wonderful gay or adoptive parents to acknowledge that this will result in some emotional pain and confusion.

    3. Whither traditional marriage? Gay marriage may, as its proponents insist, strengthen the ideal of marriage by offering the highest public acceptance only to those in committed relationships.

    But even gay activists admit they are seeking to change the marriage ideal. Eliminating the complementarity of the sexes in marriage changes its essence. It may be old-fashioned to believe women are still necessary to domesticate sexually predatory men. But most social arrangements in which men operate without attachment to women are deeply dysfunctional. Many gay advocates tacitly admit as much.

    Andrew Sullivan, in his book “Virtually Normal,” writes that the need for “extramarital outlets” should be recognized by partners in a same-sex marriage, and that gays should not be constrained by a “single, moralistic model.”

    4. Education. It is possible the social impact of gay marriage on heterosexual marriage will be negligible. But the changes it will bring to our schools make this unlikely. A California task force appointed in 2001 recommended all curriculums there be changed to include alternative sexual lifestyles. In 2006, a federal judge in Massachusetts ruled that schools have a duty to teach children that there’s moral equivalency between homosexual and heterosexual relationships – and have no obligation to let parents opt their children out of such instruction.

    5. Husbands. Federal Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling in August on California’s Proposition 8 – that “gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage” – confirmed the view that marriage is foremost about sexual choice, not reproduction. Think there are too few marriageable males now?

    Ask sociologist Orlando Patterson what happens when men are no longer tied to marriage through child rearing. He attributes high out-of-wedlock birthrates among African-Americans to the history of slavery, job discrimination and the welfare state, all of which separated black men from the expectation of secure paternity.

    These are just a few examples of how putting gay unions on a legal par with heterosexual ones may radically alter our culture. We should not be deluded into believing that nothing will change.