Let’s Get Married, And Have A Gay Old Time! Part Two

Welcome back! I hope you had a nice break. Did you make yourself a cup of tea? Grab a biscuit? Someone’s tush? Go on. I dare you. Anyway, let’s press on, shall we?

4:

• It could provide a slippery slope in the legality of marriage (e.g. having multiple wives or marrying an animal could be next). Gay rights activists claim that these marriages should be allowed because it doesn’t hurt anyone, but it could start a chain reaction that destroys the whole idea of marriage. If someone wants to marry his dog, why shouldn’t he be able to? What if someone wants to marry their brother or parent? What if someone wants to marry their blow-up doll or have 10 wives? Unless we develop some firm definition of what a marriage is, the options are endless. If these options sound absurd, remember that all it takes is a few activist judges to use the statute to open the door. It doesn’t matter if 95 percent of the population disagrees with the policy, one judge can interpret the case the way he or she wants and use the doctrine of stare decisis to impose a law on everyone. Do you remember how two judges in California recently declared the Pledge of Allegiance unconstitutional? If the decision hadn’t been overturned, it would have prevented millions of children from being able to say the pledge every morning, despite the fact that 95+ percent of Americans disagreed with the decision.

Yet it was overturned. Besides, while that was involving an act, gay marriage is the recognition of a way of life, and sanctioning it in the eyes of the law. Once again, it is not the duty of the government to legislate morality. Too, it would be wrong to place gay marriage on a same level with polygamy and bestiality. Polygamy, which is a separate issue that I feel shouldn’t be discussed in great detail here, is still the marriage of man and woman, and not a chauvinistic position. It could just as easily be one woman and several men. Or we could cross over the two things, and have several men marry each other.

Take That, You Outdated Moralists!

Bestiality is not a marriage of equality. To marry you must give verbal consent, and then sign a legal documentation. I don’t really know all that many that can do both. Except maybe parrots.

'Do You Take This Mare To Be Your Lawfully Wedded Wife?' 'Ney!'

This sort of argument is known as a slippery slope fallacy. I’ll leave you to google it, to gain a full understanding. Though, personally, I wouldn’t mind marrying a blow up doll. You give it a little prick and it goes down on you.

5:

• It confuses children about gender roles and expectations of society, and only a man & woman can pro-create. Children learn about expectations and gender roles from society. It’s difficult to teach the importance and traditions of the family when such confusion is thrust upon them. Only a man and woman can bear children, and for thousands of years, a man & woman headed household has carried generations of people through life. 

In actuality, studies have shown that children with gay and lesbian parents are a lot more rounded, accepting members of society, with a clear sense of gender roles, though I will admit that said studies are relatively few. I believe this to be because gay parents adopting kids is something ‘new’ to the world, and as such there hasn’t been much chance to research it. This touches upon one of the major issues that people seem to have. That gays and lesbians wouldn’t make good parents. I believe this to be false. If you’ll allow the general assumption, I believe that most gays, in their childhood (if they were openly gay) probably suffered a lot of abuse from their peers. Even when I was a kid at school (not so long ago, but I’ll not say exactly when!) to call another ‘gay’ or ‘queer’ were fightin’ words. I can’t even name any kids who were openly gay, such was the bias. Were they to be so, I feel it would be more than likely that they would suffer such abuse. But, in a way, a very morbid, twisted way, this could help them. Rather, help them to help their kids – because of the fact that they’d have been through it all, too, they could give very good advice on how to cope with taunting, or bullying. Besides, they already know how to put talcum powder on sore bottoms. I could even bring up the stereotypical ‘flaming ‘mo’, who are more feminine than women, but that might reinforce the stereotype, so won’t.

Let's Go Sailin'!

Another thing I’ve heard floating around on the internet, and just couldn’t pass up putting in, was this: Person 1: Gay parents will only produce gay children. Person 2: In the same way straight parents only produce straight children. 

And lastly:

• The gay lifestyle is not something to be encouraged, as a lot of research shows it leads to a much lower life expectancy, psychological disorders, and other problems. Studies show that homosexuals, for a variety of reasons, have life expectancies of approximately 20 years less than the general population. Just like a lifestyle of smoking, drinking, etc., unhealthy lifestyles should be discouraged. 

I’ll be honest with you, I think I should bow out of this here. I’ve studiously avoided providing links, because I believe people should do their own research, and come to their own conclusions. I will say a few things on this, which are another’s views, but ones that I agree with. It ‘suggests the lifestyle is a choice. That people choose to be gay and can control that’, and that ‘I suspect that if the life expectancy/psych issues are true, it’s because of the pressures homosexuals are under because of the prejudice against them’.

One final thought, to round-up this double-blog post. On the JK forums, there is a there is a thread which is about this subject, but it asks, why do we, the public at large, have a say? So, why do we have a say? Because we live in a democracy, fuckwits! 😛

Sorry, I don’t mean to sound harsh on that last bit, but I couldn’t resist the wording. That’s it for this week. I hope you enjoyed the blog(s)!

This is JV – signing off.