So what's our reason for writing this post? For us the gay marriage issue is secondary to the logical disconnect in our national debate on the role of the Federal government in relation to personal freedom vs. government intrusion and by extension Federal rights vs. State rights.
What we find totally bizarre is that the Federal government says that an individual has the right to chose the person they want to spend the rest of their life with but can't choose their own level of care to prolong that same life with that significant other.
Left ot their own devices our lawmakers and judges will create a patchwork of laws that has neither logic nor precedents as an underpinning. Now this may be okay for some who are able to find that special loophole to pursue their happiness, for most of us it will only be a matter of time before we inadvertently violate some illogical fiat and have all that we own, love and worked for snatched away.
Okay we're off our soapbox....
ANALYSIS: We're going to do do a full analysis of all mutual funds as it relates to HoCha and NoSa later in the week that will include this new development
Posts
I saw the title of the post on FB and was pleasently surprised at your posting. unilike some of the rants I've seen on other blogs including Bil Brownings and Abdul's your posting is thought provoking. Keep it up gys (and gals)!
ReplyDeleteDon't be fooled by Abdul's rants. He stands for nothing and only writes posts to create noise. And a good attorney? Hardly.
ReplyDeleteI know this is a bit of focus but I'd say that with this ruling everything is on the table polygamy, child/adult relationships. Think about it, he basically said that being attractiveness to the other sex is biological, so what keeps a rapist or child predator from saying the same thing. I just question the logic of the Judge's ruling. If all behavior can be traist to biological roots then all behavior can be protected under the equal protection clause. What do you say IPSE?
ReplyDeleteOnly a gay white male judge would equate homosexuality with being a minority. That's what liberals don't understand is that most minorites are pissed that a bunch of gays and lesbians who have the option to disclose their sexuality (like anyone really cares) can compare to what Latino, Native Americans and African-Americans have been through over the last 400 years.
ReplyDeleteJosh, that's a slippery slope argument. Part of the slippery slope is you go from Point A (marriage as it is now, heterosexual only) to Point Z (bestiality, 25 wives, etc...) and ignoring the middle ground completely.
ReplyDeletePolygamy is pointless, as far as a civil marriage goes, since the benefits and tax breaks, etc... are based around two adults. Children can't legally consent, so that rules out any NAMBLA crap.
I beg to differ Indy, once it becomes law then all that is required is to show a biological pre-disposition. That's the anchor in the ruling. if you listen to the rhetorical arguments its about Government not dictating who you can love or have a marriage with. Using the same language you can authorize any arrangement you can think of just fill in the blank. NAMBLA is still in the game along with polygamy, especially polygamy think about the savings a man or woman can have on healthcare costs. Or for that matter sibilings. Sounds far fetched and "unnatural". Sorry as the judge said and I paraphrase - that such attitudes cannot sustain a prohibition of a marriage.
ReplyDeleteGood Point Josh, like it or not it is a slippery slop once tyou redefine marriage, it terms of gender. You can now negotiate number and any other combination you can think of.
ReplyDeleteBeing gay and being Latino, Philipino or black is not the same. And no amount of laws wil make it so. Sexual orientation, preference or whatever new term they want to throw out is not immutable. And at the very least unless they disclose the fact no one gives a rat's ass. And just for the record my sister is gay.
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to read the Supreme Court decision after the appeal reaches it.
ReplyDeleteI happen to agree with gay marriage but when gay leftists start talking they're about as useful as a gay pride parade for the cause.
ReplyDeleteThe gay community needs to get a few things straight. Yes, the religious right is a minor annoyance to your sexual orientation. Yes, they think you're morally wrong, but most really don't care what you do as long as you don't do it in their face. If you're their neighbor and you ask them for help with something, they will almost certainly do it.
Sometimes in life you have to do things your neighbors don't approve of. That is life. The social position of gay Americans isn't perfect (whose position is?) but it's getting better.
If you really, honestly care about gay rights, Christians aren't your biggest problem. Not even close.
Here in America we debate whether we should call gay unions "marriage" or something else.
In Iran they debate whether they should hang gays or chop off their head.
That's right. They KILL you. They catch you being gay, the f**king kill you.
Here our most religious extremist openly frown on you. I know. I know. They frown on you. How mean of them. They don't like what you do and they tell you that you should do something else.
Here, or nastiest, most extreme religious nuts commit the cardinal sin of not minding their own business. How terrifying. How unspeakable. How like the Holocaust.
In the Middle East? Oh, yeah, they hunt you down and hang you and your boyfriend together in a way so you don't die immediately but rather can actually watch each other die.
Again, let's be clear. They f**king kill you. They do it with glee. And they make your loved ones watch.
Few things burn me up more than someone claiming they're talking about gay rights but all they're really doing is disguising a morally bankrupt, leftist attack on America.
We're not perfect, but like everyone else in this country, gays should be thankful that they are here and not somewhere else.