As this issue keeps circling around the pipe, ever since the Bush administration (and probably before, but I was only a teenager a little boy during the Clinton years so I'm not too sure) I've been hearing about this issue of gay marriage, and the issue has gotten louder as of late. Really whenever the issue is brought up, I can't help feeling like the only guy in the room who realized something was wrong with the entire scenario, when his group started debating whether they should hold funeral services for ten-year-old Tommy, who they killed because he was an annoying child.
Isn't recognizing or not recognizing a marriage the purview of the church? Don't get me wrong, if my church starts hosting gay marriages, I won't be a member any longer but why does that mean a church I don't go to can't host those marriages?
Do I think gay marriage is wrong? Absolutely! Course I also think portraying one night stands as normal and productive to young people, gay or straight, is wrong, but I don't see any movement on banning certain movies. I think an open comical look at illegal drugs as normal during a movie based on a children's toy line is pretty much disgusting, but I'm not going to ban the selling of Transformers 2. What do all these things have in common? They're all wrong but don't cause any kind of physical or emotional damage to those not willfully participating.
I don't know, I support shrinking the government, banning abortion, the average citizen having the right to own a sub machine gun and the attacking of openly hostile, defiant and genocidal nation states to give UN resolutions some freaking backbone, but I feel lost to the republican party on this issue. Why should the government have to right to say who is married and who isn't anywhere, especially the federal government? If it's for tax reasons and married couples need tax breaks just to get along... isn't that more an issue for tax reform? I don't know, if taxes are so freaking high on a man's wife and children not earning money... maybe we shouldn't tax unemployed stay at home moms and ten-year-old brats in the first place... just a thought. And if taxes are reasonable where you live (first off, where to do you live cause I'm a comn' over) and you still can't afford to have children, then wear condoms and adopt out... again, just a thought. (If you can't afford children, maybe you shouldn't be trying to have them. Children are human beings, not pieces of property and you do have a right to them if you can't take care of them.)
I guess the only real time people have me on this issue is when they start talking about adopting children out to gay couples for social experiments. If that's the issue I can see where you're coming from, but again, that's not an issue of marriage, it's an issue of state and federal laws regarding adoption. To me, single parents should only be allowed the kids that pop out of their own unfortunate misguided relationships naturally, not orphans and victims of abuse or neglect. People with criminal histories should not be allowed to adopt, yes I know you paid your dues but there comes a time when we have to say, maybe you just shouldn't have committed armed robbery in a key bank in the first place. I don't think you should be able to adopt if your shown to not be financially ready for the responsibility. And finally adopting children out to strange relationships just to prove a social point that we weren't sure about when we did it... is freaking appalling. But this is all because children are human beings who can't say "no" in a way we recognize so yes, we should walk on egg shells to get things right for them. Meaning yes, even if we recognize a marriage with a man who is a convicted rapist, that couple doesn't get access to a kid who just got pulled out of an abusive relationship. It also means that if there is no woman in a relationship to be a female role model, I don't think the couple should have a little boy or girl. Is what I'm saying making sense here?
My point, the federal government shouldn't be in the business of defining or recognizing marriages in the first place, nor telling you that you have to recognize them either. Gay or straight this is not the purview of the federal government.