Day 2 - True Colors Flying

And so the sun rises on day two of the political and social fall-out of the Supreme Court's gay marriage ruling. And now, people are really showing who they are and what they stand for. I haven't been this scared in years.

Senator Dan Swecker - R from Rochester was quoted in The Olympian as saying,

"Marriage is about children, not two people falling in love, said Sen. Dan Swecker, a self-defined conservative Christian who has been married for 30 years. "I really hate to see us lose that major thesis in our thinking as a people, or in our thinking in governance and laws," he said."

Looks like someone has had a rough 30 years with his spouse. This brilliant mind went on to say,

"My overwhelming personal reaction to it is that sense of compassion," he said. "Hey, we're all caught in some kind of sin or another. And when we do that, it separates us from God. I don't think those people are any more separated from God than I am."

Alright, if that kind of a statement doesn't worry you, I fear for out future.

I'm not just a naysayer though. I do have suggestions to fix said issues. I have a proposal, that we institute a federal law saying that anytime, ANY politician invokes the name of the Lord, in any way, shape, or form - be it "God", "Jesus", "Golden Calf", whatever, while speaking in his/her duties as a state funded politician - they are to be fined no less thatn $10,000. On the spot. No questions asked. With a law like that on the books, the stupid outburst would have cost Sen. Swecker $20,000. I would say, add in $5,000 fines for religious references, such as "sin" or mentions to the "Bible". That would leave Mr. Swecker's bill at $25,000. And while he may be a slow learner, I feel he would take a hint soon enough and if not, well, that's a hell of a state fundraiser.

Seperation of church and state is not a hard concept to understand. It really isn't. All you have to do is keep your own personal invisible man, his fictional book, and his invisible policies out of the realm of politics. You can enforce it in your home all you want, but keep it out of politics.


Whew. Now to the issue at hand...

First off, let's remember that this ban denies people labeled as 'gay' or 'homosexual' from receiving the same benefits as people who are 'straight' or 'heterosexual'.

Look. Anyway you want to look at it, that is a form of discrimination. I don't care if you call it marriage. I don't care if you call it civil unions, bonds, laws, or what have you. Call it 'faggot rights' for all I care (though I feel some may raise a louder ruckus on that term). YOU HAVE TO GIVE EVERY CITIZEN EQUALITY.

Marriage is a privilege. But it is not a privilege granted to you by your God. Every couple, of every faith, has to make their way to their local government office and get a certificate signed that allows them the governmental privilege's of deciding to join together as a single entity.

These are rights being given. To not allow another citizen to attain these rights because of who they are, be it black, gay, crippled, or mentally handicapped, is flat-out discrimination and cannot stand if our society hopes to be the forerunner of equality and justice in the world.

We were one of the last countries to pass civil rights. Wasn't the shame of that enough? Have we learned nothing from history? The "homosexual agenda" as dubbed, will win. Period. Eventually, and I feel far and away before the end of my life, will get their rights, under whatever name they want and this will be remembered as another shameful pitfall in our "equal treatment" ideal.