Well, the politicians will have their hands full with this one. It's an issue none of them really want to get involved with and now it's front and center. So much so that a "constitutional amendment" is being considered to "preserve the sanctity of marriage"...ouch!

No doubt about it when you want to polarize the public this is the sort of issue political campaigns are made of. Do I see this as an important issue? Not in the least...but the politicians will. I think it's going to cause some people to say some really crazy stuff too.

I'm not making light of the issue but this will be particularly entertaining because...and this is quite humorous...politicians will be forced to "out" themselves to some extent with this issue...and I don't mean admit they are gay...I mean admit to how full of crap they really are. They deserve this issue the whole lot of them...right, left, and center. Personally I love that aspect of this.

Of course there are bad parts to this issue as well. While the Republicans will suffer no immediate damage from this issue (I think the damage to them will come in the future) this will more than likely be a lot more painful to the Democrats. Which is sad to some extent because in looking at the issue honestly...something I think the majority of people will not do...the Democrats will end up being more correct about this issue than the Republicans...but in this case honesty and correctness will probably be costly to them. Fury, hatred and lies will probably play better in the public arena than honesty and acceptance.  

Big lie number one is already front and center...that the judicial system failed us here and liberals somehow caused this. When you look at this issue from a legal standpoint the judges that made this decision had no other choice...they don't make decisions based on public opinion, moral outrage, or theological teachings. They make them based on the law. In fact the system worked here...some people put an issue that concerned them before the courts to challenge something they saw as wrong and the courts ruled in accordance with the law. It's not about how the majority feels...and I find it amusing that Republicans who got a president elected with less than a majority would even touch that particular subject but again people will use whatever they can to support their side.

The heart of the matter is...How does a state provide certain rights and acknowledgements to heterosexuals and recognize their right to marry but deny these rights to someone else only because they have a different sexual preference? It would be the same as saying...Everyone can get married except Chinese people...or Everyone can get married except people born on a tuesday...Or Everyone can get married except people who eat meat on Fridays during Lent. 

See the thing is we've separated Church and State and if anyone should be debating the "Sanctity Of Marriage" it should be the Church not the State. All the churches that wish too can deny same sex partners the right to marry within their organization...specifically because they are a separate and private organization. The state should only be concerned with providing all citizens the same rights. Case closed.

Now this leads us to lots of other little lies and nonsense. I love when a moron like O'Reilly (and I apologize for using him because I know he's a hot button but he said this) says foolish things like "What's next a man can marry his goat?"

The enormous issue with that is that animals are not "citizens" and do not fall under the rights granted by the constitution. So, as cute as that may sound to Billy...it's about as dumb a thing as you can say. Hilarious really...which is why I personally find O'Reilly entertaining at times...he's a loon.

I've also heard the following stupidity:

"Homosexuality is a birth defect."

"Homosexuality is a disease."

"Homosexuality is a mental disorder."

"Homosexuality is a crime." (sodomy is illegal)

"Homosexuality is proof positive someone is insane" (sort of falls under the mental disorder issue)

Now as too all the medical references, I don't think (Gene can correct me if I'm wrong...he's our resident doctor) medical science has proven any thing or would view as serious any links between sexual preference and insanity or birth defects and there's been no declaration from the medical community that we are "plagued with the disease of homosexuality" and we need to find a cure. You may however be able to prove a man that wants to have sex with a goat is insane...and we may as a whole agree on that.

That's not all though. How about these:

"Homosexuality is a sin against God."

Well that's for God to work out and not the State.

"This will lead to being able to marry multiple partners."

Again, boy is this one dumb. I mean for a long time Mormons allowed this practice and society did not go all to hell because of it. Second, we have laws on the books that prevent this...so legally it ain't gonna happen.

"Marriage is meant to produce children."

Really? I guess a lot of people missed that on the state marriage license (it says nothing about you must produce offspring) and better get to work. The fact is having children has nothing to do with the right to marry...many people marry with no intent to have kids. Many people get married and can't have kids. It's not a vehicle to having children. Again a lie to suit someones agenda.

"Homosexuality is against nature."

The theory here of course is that a same sex relationship can't produce kids. Having already established that kids do not equal marriage and marriage does not equal kids we already no this is nuts but we'll go there anyway. If nature wanted to create a device to stop homosexuality it would have...but it did not. This also has introduced the brilliant theory from some:

"If homosexuality were correct and we were all homosexuals mankind would vanish because we would not propagate the species."

First, didn't David Crosby provide an assist to a same sex couple that wanted a child? Second, as long as there are a male and a female we can reproduce nature provided for that. Third, a hell of a lot of us are extremely attracted to the opposite sex. Fourth, I love when someone uses an extreme hypothetical to support their already weak argument. This always happens when nothing in "reality" supports what they are trying to sell you.

Man created the idea of marriage...I always see it as it was so us guys could "own" or "possess" those magnificent creatures known as women. Nature did not create marriage, so anyone that argues marriage and nature have anything to do with one another is already lost or subject to religious dogma, which of course means they are preaching from their agenda.

So, despite what anyone says this minor legal decision is nothing more or less than a gigantic political ball to be tossed about. It will polarize people, hurt peoples feelings, cause people to say crazy crap, and it will reveal many folks for what they really are. It is going to be ugly. This is quite sad. In order to learn anything though we must be challenged. This issue will challenge us.

One last one I want to add:

"This decision will have a negative effect on children."

In almost all cases what creates the most confusion for a child is what their parents teach them through their words and actions. You teach a child how to hate and you teach a child how to love. You're not born with predudice in your blood you have to learn it. Belief systems are taught not ingrained at birth.

So, watch the fireworks and listen to the lies on this one. It's not an issue of "liberal decay" the court did what it had to do. Make no mistake though, this issue will teach us something...hopefully we'll be better for the lesson and not worse.

                                                                    Reg