Wednesday, May 9, 2012

Obama Finally Tells the Truth

Well I suppose I ought to address the "big news" today. Isn't it just something that this White House is so concerned with social issues? Wasn't it just a few months ago they, and their ever complicit media, calling for a focus on the economy and not these silly and inconsequential moral issues? PTOOIE!

Anyway, here's a quick rundown of why what people are calling "gay marriage" shouldn't be endorsed by the state.

Marriage, properly defined, only consists of one man and one woman.

Any other concept one tries applies the word to is unwarranted.

The state has a vested interest in fostering and promoting real marriage (procreation and a strong social unit). As a result of the sexual relationship the state fosters and promotes in real marriage, the state fosters the creation of new taxpayers and new additions to society.

The state has no reason to promote two dudes' or two chicks' sexual relationship, because they gain nothing from it. In fact, the state, in fostering and promoting the sexual relationship of homosexuals, would be promoting a perversion. But clearly the state shouldn't promote perversions. Nor should it promote activities that are extreme health risks, as homosexual activities are.

Heterosexuals have no more rights than homosexuals. They all have access to the institution of marriage. Both of them can marry:
  • only one person 
  • of the opposite sex
  • of the same species
  • of proper age (or receiving parents' permission)
Anyone with any proclivity toward any strange sexual perversion has this access. Just because someone suddenly becomes infatuated with some strange sexual preference doesn't mean the government, or anyone else, then has a reason to endorse said strange perversion.

What homosexuals are doing is attempting to have an extra benefit bestowed upon them for no good reason. The state, if it acquiesces, shows how utterly dumb it is.