Times like these

An Age of Embarrassment

In light of recent news, which I will get to later, I am about to engage in a rant-n-rave about the rights of the people and the regulatory actions taken by the government to limit our rights, as human beings. Let us start off with the first topic, and probably the most heated debate you heard in the past election:

“Marriage was intended to be between a man and a woman.”

If you are going to use history to justify why a person cannot marry someone of the same sex, then use it fully, not just in the context you intend to propagate.

Marriage, The Origins

Long before peoples joined together to form tribes and towns and governing bodies, nobody got married. You found someone who was willing to take it or give it so that you could have some people around the cave to help you hunt buffalo. As humans gathered together in tribes they began to realize the need for defining limits. Cavemen would steal each others animals and furs and in retaliation, you’d get a boulder dropped on you. At first, this was all “O-B-K-B” and nobody said a word (chances are you’d get smacked by a tree). At some point, the strongest of the strong stood up and said, “Stop killing, we need hunters and fighters, not dead bodies.”

From this humans began to realize they had to work together. A few stages into the evolution of a nation we find ourselves looking to a higher power for answers that nobody could agree on. One idea was spread around, then another and not long afterwards there were hundreds of ideas. Where did we come from? What happens at birth or death? When a group of people became worried about not finding the right answer, they began to band together. The more people that surrounded them and believed in the same origins and end results of life, the more comfortable they felt.

Religion is born.

Before I get too much into religion, which happens to be another topic I need to update on this page, let me jump ahead a couple thousand years to the point where people started to develop governing bodies.

Originally, governing bodies were put in place to regulate the belief systems of a people. The educated convinced the layman’s that the “Higher Power” spoke to them and set forth laws by which to abide. This is the point where marriage becomes an “institution.” All around these villages you could see the clear separation between the rich and educated and the poor and foolish. The rich wanted no part in the lives of the poor, so they all agreed, only marry those who are as wealthy or more wealthy.

Blood lines are now established.

At this point, marriage became regulated which made it a “sin” to marry outside of the “class” you were born into. God put you on this Earth to serve a purpose and it is his intention that you and your family and your people serve this purpose until God himself says otherwise.

Fast forward to Ancient Rome and introducing, the engagement ring.

The engagement ring came into place during the times of Ancient Rome. The circle shape of the ring became a profound statement to the man and woman that this marriage was to last for all of eternity. Uber-sweet.

1500’s and a pissed off Church

Prior to the 1500’s there wasn’t always a ceremony to celebrate and mark the beginning of a marriage. Until then, only the wealthy could afford such lavish celebrations for something that was viewed as “the next logical step in life.” By this time in history, man had made the correlation of marriage between a man and woman to Jesus and the church. Many took this as a sign that Jesus intended marriage to be this way and only this way. The fact is, Jesus said nothing more than – “Don’t fuck your boy’s wife.”

Anyways, to ensure that marriages were done in accordance with the rules set forth by the religious government, a priest and two witnesses must be present at all marriages and a certificate will be provided to mark the occasion as legitimate.

Don’t forget how much Socrates loved his men. Fast forward to the 19^th Century.

America realizes that religion is a powerful influence, hence the founding of America. To curb the growing influence of the religious parties, we decided to curb them in their endeavors and we separated religious and government bodies (as to not repeat the very persecution we ran from). Don’t forget this.

Present Day

George W. Bush says, “God did not intend marriage to be between peoples of the same sex.” Regardless of whether or not God did or did not say this, we mustn’t forget some major flaws with the President saying this:

1. Separation of Church and State?
1. Even if God said this, God is not the governing body. The elected officials are.
2. If God says men can’t marry men, then why can I go through a drive through window in Las Vegas and get married to a half conscious, drunk hooker?
3. God didn’t say this. Man did.
4. I’ve devoted my entire life to being with someone, man or woman. When my life is getting near its end, I draw up my Last Will and Testament and leave everything to my partner. If the government issues me a marriage certificate then I am not taxed on the inheritance. Without the certificate, you get taxed at the luxury rate of 44%.
5. Want to oversee a wedding and stand in as the priest? Take this online test and for $9.95 you can legally wed a couple!!
1. I cannot begin to speak on this without first exploding from the anger that arises as a result of the hypocrisy.
   

Let us revisit that first quote I mentioned: “Marriage was intended to be between a man and a woman.”

Now let’s modify this quote and strip out all of the bullshit. Let us say exactly what this sentence wants to say:

“Marriage is my way of keeping you away from me and a way to keep your kind from infecting my perfect people and family.”

I think that’s what they really wanted to say. The uptight, Hitlerish Elitist that this President has become is on the verge of becoming the next man to start a genocide, against homosexuals (who happen to be homosapiens first). The fact of the matter is George W. uses Catholocism as a soapbox. He knows that people who are devoted to a religion, devote their lives to that belief system. In essence, he knows that those people are casting votes to a religious ideal rather than a "Who do you want to run this country" ideal. I guess he learned one thing in between snorting lines at Yale, preach to the masses.

I have trouble focusing on this topic because the root of the topic is not simply religious. The entire foundation of a society and the implementation of a government (can you tell I'm a consultant?) is in question when you make broad-sweeping remarks that a private institution can and should be regulated by the public.

Are you comfortable allowing the government to regulate who can and cannot get married?

Before you answer the question, consider this. Precedence is what determines 75% of all laws and rulings. The first thing an attorney does before they ponder a defense, is look for precedent. Did a judge rule in our favor in the past for a similar case? If so, the presiding judge must take that case and its ruling into consideration when contemplating the current case. This "Law of Precedence" was set in place for two reasons:

1. To protect the power and influence of a judge who was elected by his people.

2. It's logical. The law cannot give clear cut details on every unique detail, therfore the translation is where precedence can come into play. If precedence is not considered, the previous cases must be reconsidered for fairness.

Now consider this. If we allow the government to regulate an institution that is regulated also by the church, who has the real power here? Also, once allowed to regulate a religious event, who is to say that precedence won't stand when the government prevents the poor from baptizing their babies? Or sending their children to Sunday School? Or buying a red car and painting your house yellow?

Once you allow the government to regulate your personal life, lawyers and lawmakers will find a way to use The Law of Precedence to regulate everything else. It's very easy to appeal to the masses because you show them only what you want them to see. The general mass of people don't want to think for themeselves. They work too much, sleep too little and don't have time for politics. They want more money and less crime so their kids can play in the front yard while they drink a bottle of wine. When our current president focuses his entire campaign around such topics of religious debate, he gets the conservative population so heated up, they become blind to reality and fail to see the underlying intent.

President George W. Bush does not care if Jared marries Jack. He doesn't care if the two of them engage in sex 11 times a day. He cares that if Jared marries Jack, then Jared and Jack pay less to the government in taxes. He cares that if married, Jared and Jack pay less in health insurance, get better mortgage rates and car loans. Bush doesn't care about the people that are devastated by such hatred and blatant discrimination. Bush cares about his multi-billion dollar industry that relies solely his name. If people hear Bush supports Same Sex Marriage, they'll pull investments and look elsewhere.

If you're looking for a plain and straight forward way to describe marriage, then take this:

“...marriage is a bond between two people that involves responsibility and legalities, as well as commitment and challenge.”

This was written by an old married couple that thinks marriage has been mutated from a beautiful and meaningful statement of love into a dirty, tax-lobbying whore. This statement says nothing of love or children or bonding.


How do you view marriage?

Marriage to me is a vow, a promise; to devote my life to my partner. To ensure their safety, happiness and well being. To join together with a person and make our world around us a better place. Marriage to me is security, strength, and comfort.

To be continued...

posted by David Malloy @ 11:17 AM