Look to Utah
Whoo hoo a Constitutional amendment defining marriage as man and woman!
Let's celebrate. Just think of all the wonderful possibilities and consequences that would happen as a result of this amendment. The United States would finally take its first step towards societal regression! For the first time in history, the law would restrict rights and discriminate, instead of liberate. Wow, what a clever guy Bush must be. Instant fame. Instant name. If the amendment ever passes, he would go down in history as the biggest bigot ever to be elected president.
Seriously, the neo-conservative religious right wing can have a cup. Why the heck do they care if people thousands of miles away are doing their own thing. It won't affect them! Their kids will be raised the same way the parents were and thus ensuring that the discriminatory thought against gays will continue. So no worries. Sure, I understand that some people don't want their kids growing up and thinking gay marriage is ok. That belief doesn't mandate that those people can restrict the expressive desires of others for their own selfish reasons.
In anycase, this issue should not be handled by the federal government; this should be given to the states. This is an issue that deals with local beliefs and the ideals within a home. The federal government does not (and it is questionable if the state government) has the right to dictate the laws of marriage upon its people. Politically, it would be suicide for the federal government to pass any amendment. Either you alienate the religious right, or you alienate homosexuals and their supporters. To make everyone happy, leave it to the states!
I think its safe estimate that at least 80% of America is against multiple spouses. Im sure that would go against the "sanctity" of marriage. However, it became a state law and everyone was happy. People in Utah are happy with their ten spouses, People outside of Utah are happy that they don't have to deal with those kind of people.
If the states passed laws allowing marriages or not, it would be hard to predict the consequences. I think there might a period of migration where people moved to certain states to get away from or show support in gay marriages. The political spectrum might be more extreme, but it's already at the point of no return so whatever. Economically, little effects. It'd be freaky if gays set up their own syndicate like Milo's in Catch-22 where every gay had a share nad manipulated prices on straight people but that's just a conspiracy theory I thought of two seconds ago. So it's probably not likely. Internationally, I don't think there will be too much response. Perhaps some western countries will support or condemn, but I think everything will cancel each other out. Plus, it's not like the other countries are really going to do anything about it. It's not like California allows gay marriage and all of a sudden China puts economic sanctions on us. I guess this would dissapoint the South. Oh well.
So ends my take on this issue.
Let's celebrate. Just think of all the wonderful possibilities and consequences that would happen as a result of this amendment. The United States would finally take its first step towards societal regression! For the first time in history, the law would restrict rights and discriminate, instead of liberate. Wow, what a clever guy Bush must be. Instant fame. Instant name. If the amendment ever passes, he would go down in history as the biggest bigot ever to be elected president.
Seriously, the neo-conservative religious right wing can have a cup. Why the heck do they care if people thousands of miles away are doing their own thing. It won't affect them! Their kids will be raised the same way the parents were and thus ensuring that the discriminatory thought against gays will continue. So no worries. Sure, I understand that some people don't want their kids growing up and thinking gay marriage is ok. That belief doesn't mandate that those people can restrict the expressive desires of others for their own selfish reasons.
In anycase, this issue should not be handled by the federal government; this should be given to the states. This is an issue that deals with local beliefs and the ideals within a home. The federal government does not (and it is questionable if the state government) has the right to dictate the laws of marriage upon its people. Politically, it would be suicide for the federal government to pass any amendment. Either you alienate the religious right, or you alienate homosexuals and their supporters. To make everyone happy, leave it to the states!
I think its safe estimate that at least 80% of America is against multiple spouses. Im sure that would go against the "sanctity" of marriage. However, it became a state law and everyone was happy. People in Utah are happy with their ten spouses, People outside of Utah are happy that they don't have to deal with those kind of people.
If the states passed laws allowing marriages or not, it would be hard to predict the consequences. I think there might a period of migration where people moved to certain states to get away from or show support in gay marriages. The political spectrum might be more extreme, but it's already at the point of no return so whatever. Economically, little effects. It'd be freaky if gays set up their own syndicate like Milo's in Catch-22 where every gay had a share nad manipulated prices on straight people but that's just a conspiracy theory I thought of two seconds ago. So it's probably not likely. Internationally, I don't think there will be too much response. Perhaps some western countries will support or condemn, but I think everything will cancel each other out. Plus, it's not like the other countries are really going to do anything about it. It's not like California allows gay marriage and all of a sudden China puts economic sanctions on us. I guess this would dissapoint the South. Oh well.
So ends my take on this issue.
posted by Anonymous at 10:12 PM
1 Comments:
I love you!
And you even discussed it civilly, without resorting to Christie-style ranting. Did Teagle really call me a "belligerent midget"?
Post a Comment
<< Home