I watched the below video today.  I think the young man says all that needs to be said about children living with same-sex parents.



To me, the arguments against same-sex marriage make very little sense.

There is the argument that they are against the word of the Bible.  I am not a religious person, but I have respect for people who are.  However, I don’t take much stock in people who take so much stock in the Bible.  It makes some sense as a guidebook, but very little as a rulebook.  After all, in the same book that is often used against homosexuality, it is said that the blind, lame, or those who are dwarves cannot approach the alter of God.

I also believe that the Bible was written by man, as were many other religious books.  Whether or not these men received word from God, I believe that each writer has put his own spin on things.  There is also the fact that many of the high points of the Bible are, as pointed out by Joseph Campbell, variations of stories that have been passed on long before the birth of Christ.

But to take the religious out of it, let’s look at some of the other protests against same-sex marriage.  The first thing to look at is the very definition of marriage, which is commonly seen as union between a man and a woman.  Some people, suck as the Family Research Council, say that it is for producing children.  They answer many questions on their web site about some protestations that might be brought against this, but I don’t think they are really sufficient.   They declare that procreation is the significant factor, and that if it were not for procreation, then there would be very little people who would even want the government to interfere in our affairs.  I guess you could ask somebody that when they are not allowed to see their partner of 30 years as they are dying, because they are not “family”.

By the way, when it comes to definitions and how we need to adhere to them--”decimate” used to mean to execute one out of every 10, but that is no longer so, and I have to say I find that desecration of Latin worse than what some want to do with “marriage”. 

One of the more laughable protests brought up by the FRC (or as I lovingly like to call them, the Fucking Retarded Cocksuckers...or Cunnilinguists, dependent on their gender), is that homosexual marriages would lead to children being without a mother and a father, which is ABSOLUTELY necessary.  I think Mr. Wahls provided a counterargument to that, but let me also add something of my own.  I have a mother and a father.  The first 15 years of my life I probably saw my father less than three years total, and that is counting the first two years in which my parents still lived together.  The next ten years I did not see him at all and had one short 15-minute phone conversation with him.  The last 15 years--nothing.  I know he’s alive, but that’s all I know.  Having a father did nothing for me.

It is not specifically mentioned on their web site, but it appears based on what they write that they would prefer a child to come from Darva Conger and Rick Rockwell or Britney Spears and Jason Alexander than from a stable homosexual relationship (which, according to their statistics, is unlikely to happen--it’s more likely a homosexual father will rape his child, do drugs, cheat on his spouse, and die of AIDS than be a stable parent).  I could take some of the fight against homosexual marriage if it was coincided with a fight against frivolous marriages.  But it’s not.

I was going to touch on Don’t Ask-Don’t Tell, but now I’m too pissed to even get into it.  I think I’m gonna go beat up some straights instead.