Strange as it may seem, this life is based on a true story." - Ashleigh Brilliant
Need to know more?
True blue Scorpio
click to view all
June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006
Thursday, July 24, 2003
I'd meant to comment on this article a while back.
Fuck Pat Robertson.
Need I say more?
No, but why don't we talk about some of his more ignorant peers...
Frist Endorses Idea of Gay Marriage Ban
My first question here, among all the other obvious ones, is why in the fuck we’re wasting money and time on worrying about gay marriages when there are so many other important issues out there the government needs to be concerned with. Protecting us from terrorist attacks is high priority for government, whether a man and a man want to be legally united is not.
At least, it shouldn’t be. The problem with lawmakers getting their panties in a wad over gay marriage is that it’s completely personal. They’re not pushing a ban because they think it will help their country or even win them votes. They’re doing it because they’re ignorant, bible-beating assholes who think they have a right to interfere in people’s personal lives if they believe said personal life disagrees with their views on their god.
Sen. Bill Frist “said the Supreme Court's decision last week on gay sex threatens to make the American home a place where criminality is condoned.” I didn’t know the Supreme Court made any decisions about “gay sex”. They made a decision about “anal and oral sex”, but I didn’t hear anything about gay sex. Yes, the law is generally viewed as a law against acts that homosexuals commit – but if that were truly true, wouldn’t cunnilingus be listed, also? Are lesbians more legal than gay men? And besides, are we saying here that straight people don’t practice oral or anal sex? I didn’t think so.
Yet, the more blaring part of Sen. Frist’s ignorance is that the decision “threatens” to make the American home a place where criminality is condoned. I’m not sure where Frist is gathering his data, but no one’s going to run out in the streets and start having lewd, public acts of anal sex just because a ban has been lifted. The number of people getting it up the ass (straight and gay) is not going to rise just because the Supreme Court has now made it legal. You have people that say “if marijuana became legal, I would smoke it” – no one ever said “if anal sex becomes legal, I’m going to do it.” Because people have always done it – and they will continue to do so, quietly and in the privacy of their own homes. The Supreme Court’s decision was a banner for the gay community because the law was used against them (even though it was not supposed to specifically target them), and it opens the door for them to have the same rights as everyone else. That’s all.
Now, if Frist is saying (as I believe he is) that this big step for gays is going to start an unprecedented wave of violence in America – or corrupt the “family values” that people still stupidly cling to in this world of broken homes and murdering mothers – it only proves the ignorance I’ve applied to him throughout this essay.
"I have this fear that this zone of privacy that we all want protected in our own homes is gradually — or I'm concerned about the potential for it gradually being encroached upon, where criminal activity within the home would in some way be condoned," Frist told ABC's "This Week."
Who lets morons like this run our country? What the fuck is he talking about anyway? What criminal activity in the home? So, Mom and Dad can now legally suck, lick and stick it in nefarious places? That’s already going on, Sen. Frist. Are you married? My condolences to your wife.
In one of the largest in-depth studies of American attitudes, a national survey of 5,700 adults found that almost 30% of divorced adults cited physical abuse as the reason for their divorce. 89% of children witness abuse at home. (http://studentlife.tamu.edu/gies/SexViolence/relvstat.htm) In some states, 63% of the children in jail for murder are there for the killing of an abusive parent. (http://womensissues.about.com/library/bldomesticviolencestats4.htm). Something tells me that most violence in the home has little to do with whether Frank and Eric, the gay couple living next door, are packin’ the fudge every Tuesday night. Ridding America of the sodomy law isn’t going to “condone” violence in the homes. Sodomy has nothing to do with violence in homes. But there I go again stating the obvious.
Frist also said “absolutely” that he was all for banning gay marriages. Of course – if we let them fuck and it magically makes violence grow, can you imagine what would happen if we let them marry?! For chrissakes, it’d be the end of the world as we know it. Armageddon.
Their big bitch is that we’d be ruining “family values” (those still exist?); the traditional man-woman marriage is the only way to keep this country pure and good. I didn’t know we were. What’s this big deal about keeping marriage sacred anyway when, in 1997, the likelihood of new marriages ending in divorce was at 43%. And the number keeps growing. Marriage isn’t sacred anymore – more than half the time, it doesn’t even last. Why all this hype about keeping marriage for only the straight people? They’ve fucked it up all to hell. ‘World magazine culture critic Gene Edward Veith notes that the homosexual drive to gain marital benefits is destroying the institution of marriage itself as people abandon commitment and embrace the "gay" notion of serial monogamy with "sex partners."’ (from http://www.cultureandfamily.org/articledisplay.asp?id=2927&department=CFI&categoryid=papers#undermine).
First, the statement seems to assume that gay people can’t fall in love, that their reasons for wanting to get married are somehow “wrong” or “impure” as opposed to the reasons straight people get married. Can we reflect for a moment on some of the reasons straight people do get married; getting knocked up, money, a need to not be alone, ‘it’s just what you do’, etc, etc. Enough said. And as for “destroying the institution of marriage” - get over it people. The “institution of marriage” is dead – and has been for quite some time. No one’s going to be able to destroy something that’s already been abused, shattered and soiled – by the very people that are crying to protect its sanctity.
The above listed web page is yet another group of people hiding behind the gripe that letting gays be gay is corrupting America, when, in fact, it simply offends their sensitive religious ideals. This is from their site, too: “When marriage is undermined, entire communities suffer. Fagan notes that broken households increase the risk for children of:
retarded cognitive, especially verbal, development;
low educational attainment;
low impulse control;
warped social development;
physical and sexual abuse;
crime in the local community.
The breakdown in marriage even leads to shorter lives. A study in the American Journal of Sociology found that "for both sexes, the hazard of dying falls significantly with marital duration, suggesting a cumulation of the benefits of marriage over time."“
Now, while every statistic listed above is undoubtedly true (or half-way believable, at best), those statistics have nothing to do with gay marriages. They are statistics written about marriage as it stands today – in heterosexual households. Letting gay people get married does not undermine marriage – they sure as hell can’t fuck up the tradition as badly as we have. Having a gay couple in the neighborhood, isn’t going to make yourhousehold or your marriage suffer. Try minding your own damn business – it works wonders.
As a conclusion, the “concerned women” (i.e. uptight, unsatisfied housewives with way too much time on their hands), state, “The stakes are very high: Absent a marriage-based culture, can America continue to function as a self-governing republic? History indicates that the chances are slim.”
First of all, we’re not self-governing. If you believe that your freedom is really free, you need to wake up. If we were really free, people in government wouldn’t have the right to tell you who you can and cannot love, have sex with, and be joined with. Besides, we aren’t even a marriage-based culture anymore, we’re a divorce-based culture, and adultery-based culture, an abuse-based culture – we’re attacking the simple fact that gay people want to have sex and be married by saying that it will increase the violence in our homes and communities, that it will ruin our morals and corrupt our children when in fact, the main problem with violence and immorality in our lives is because we refuse to take responsibility for our own actions. Stop worrying what all the gay people are doing, and pay attention to your own life – your own failing marriage and your own bad kids. Stopping violence and re-establishing family values is as simple as putting as much work into your home life as you do trying to ban others from having one. Live and let live – and mind your own fucking business.
And on a side side note,
Bush says "I don't know if it's necessary yet" in regards to banning gay marriages, however he states, "What I do support is a notion that marriage is between a man and a woman." Well, I support is marriage between two people that love each other and a fucking government that keeps their damn religious opinions to themselves.