on my way to work
I just learned something new from shannon's blog. not her normal blog, but the one called "learn something new" or something like that..
anyway. there's this thing called initiative 957 that was accepted by the state legislature on january 26th 2007. here's the text of the wiki article:
Initiative 957 is a proposed ballot initiative in the state of Washington. It would require that all marriages recognized by the state have produced offspring within three years of their solemnization. The initiative was created by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance, a gay rights group. The goal of Initiative 957 is to directly challenge Andersen v. King County, which holds that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is a compelling state interest in order to encourage reproduction. The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance hopes to use this to create a test case in order to have a court strike down the measure and highlight what they perceive as weaknesses within the logic of Andersen. The initiative was accepted by the state on January 26, 2007.
This most brilliant thing i've ever seen... Just like the way that limiting domestic partnerships to prevent gay people from having the rights and privileges accorded to that, preventing straight people who aren't interested in having kids (right away or otherwise) from being married is hilarious... in 50 years we'll think of all this outright discrimination and segregation of marriage (separate is inherently not equal) as ridiculous as miscegenation laws were... and the thought today of preventing people of different races from getting married is relegated to the rapidly declining minds of the very old and confused. when I'm 77... i wonder what new groups of people will be asking for marriage then.. who else can't get married? oh! it'll be poly-amorous folks! i don't think they can all get married.. two within the group could, but in order for the rest to get in on the thing they'd need to change laws. i'm all for that too. those people deserve some kind of recognition. anyway.. maybe if they get added to the debate right now they can speed things up a bit... in honor of valentine's day coming up, i wish everyone in love the best. now i have to go to work.
anyway. there's this thing called initiative 957 that was accepted by the state legislature on january 26th 2007. here's the text of the wiki article:
Initiative 957 is a proposed ballot initiative in the state of Washington. It would require that all marriages recognized by the state have produced offspring within three years of their solemnization. The initiative was created by the Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance, a gay rights group. The goal of Initiative 957 is to directly challenge Andersen v. King County, which holds that limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples is a compelling state interest in order to encourage reproduction. The Washington Defense of Marriage Alliance hopes to use this to create a test case in order to have a court strike down the measure and highlight what they perceive as weaknesses within the logic of Andersen. The initiative was accepted by the state on January 26, 2007.
This most brilliant thing i've ever seen... Just like the way that limiting domestic partnerships to prevent gay people from having the rights and privileges accorded to that, preventing straight people who aren't interested in having kids (right away or otherwise) from being married is hilarious... in 50 years we'll think of all this outright discrimination and segregation of marriage (separate is inherently not equal) as ridiculous as miscegenation laws were... and the thought today of preventing people of different races from getting married is relegated to the rapidly declining minds of the very old and confused. when I'm 77... i wonder what new groups of people will be asking for marriage then.. who else can't get married? oh! it'll be poly-amorous folks! i don't think they can all get married.. two within the group could, but in order for the rest to get in on the thing they'd need to change laws. i'm all for that too. those people deserve some kind of recognition. anyway.. maybe if they get added to the debate right now they can speed things up a bit... in honor of valentine's day coming up, i wish everyone in love the best. now i have to go to work.
5 Comments:
I'm still uncomfortable with polyamory (it just seems like things have a tendancy to get unbalanced in those relationships), but yay for legally acknowledged gay marriage! :D
Umm...call me stupid, but wouldn't people who practice polyamory who get married then be practicing polygamy? I had to look up polyamory, because I was pretty sure what it meant but thought that people who believe in this were on the anti-marriage anti-commitment side...anywho, what I really wanted to say was this:
Christians and bigots (or Christian bigots, pardon the oxymoron) are usually the people who are so freaked out about gay marriage...which I really don't quite understand. First of all, the legality of certain kinds of unions as defined by our government has no baring on the supernatural Covenant that is promised in the Bible. The problem is that many Christians have no idea beyond secular definitions what Christian marriage really is. So they base their definition on the fact that its one man and one woman, but, because of their own inability to actually have a deep spiritual connection with their spouse (usually due to selfishness, abuse, etc.) they ignore all the other requirments of a truely Christian marriage. We (poo, I am one of them...) need to quit worrying about what the government says is marriage, and if you are a Christian, then pay attention to your own stinking marriage and what the God you 'believe' in has to say about it. Nothing the gov'ment has to say about marriage will ever make it illegal for hetero-sexual couples to marry, and if it really is going to have such a negative affect on society (which I don't believe it will have any real effect at all...)then the bigots can sit and cross their arms and say "I told you so!" while they don't do anything to care for the hurting people around them...
Bravo! I like your line. I think we've both expressed before our distaste for the governments telling people what to do or worse, what to think or feel. so maybe if we just stopped meddling as a society... things would be less meddlesome
Meddle, medely medly poo...
do you ever get the feeling there are "leaders" out there who exploit or perhaps misuse the word Christian in order to get people to think they're supposed to agree with them? i sometimes do....
Post a Comment
<< Home