Skip to comments.Is it time to simply outlaw marriage and just start over with something more fair and equal?
Posted on 08/08/2012 7:15:08 AM PDT by sickoflibs
Now that we have a president who was brave enough to stand up for marriage equality (same-sex marriage) we have turned the corner. Being the first (half) African-American President he understands oppression first hand from his years at Harvard Law (he read all about it there) and so he empathizes with the Lesbian-Gay-Bisexual-Transvestite (LGBT ) community and he has taken a bold, brave and historic stand for them in this election year.
But I think his actions have not gone far enough. Marriage itself is a primitive tribalistic ritual created by men to dominate women and more-so to make LGBTs, those with alternative lifestyles and orientations, feel inferior to the majority. This is clearly a hate-based legal sanctum. This government endorsed hate-ritual cannot be saved at all if we are to have social justice and fairness and equality in this county. Opposition to marriage equality is akin to slavery. Saving marriage would be like fixing slavery by creating a term called slavery-equality which allows blacks to own slaves themselves. That would be immoral just like trying to save marriage would.
So what can be done to right this injustice? First we need to re-elect Obama and then we need to convince two of the conservative justices, ideally Scalia and Thomas, to retire. This will require plenty of continuous protest and harassment of them personally to make them see the error of their ways and resign but it will eventually work.
After that Obama should appoint two more fair minded wise (liberal) justices to the court, one of which should be the first homosexual and the other the first transvestite, both who will understand the bonds of unfairness and are willing to rule the act of marriage totally unconstitutional by using the constitution correctly. The constitution should be viewed as a symbol of our vision of the way we think the world should be to be fair, not as a set of written rules that we must follow. The written constitution was written by a bunch of white-men-racist-sexist-homophobes and so the words in it mean nothing to us.
This judicial constitutional decision will of course will invalidate marriage for everyone in the country at once and throw millions of couples and their childrens lives into total chaos. In the same ruling the Supreme court needs to give the congress the set of guidelines to pass a complete replacement for marriage that gives back traditional opposite sex couples their benefits and recognition, but at the same time it treats LGBTs equally to them under a new label. What choice will congress have but to pass it?
I propose a new legalized domestic partner legal sanction that completely replaces marriage called the duel-partnership-domestic-contract that allows any pairs of adults to join together in getting the special legal benefits of marriage like paying the AMT, social security for spouses and most important full social recognition. Then this country will be fair and we can be proud of it, OK, maybe its not that far but at least some progress will have been made.
It also needs to overturn DOMA as a hate based law. You cant defend hate
Is this some sort of satire? I’m a little tired of all the satire posts.
Maybe this one is more to your liking:
I think the better approach would be to flatten the tax code, stop trying to manipulate people with it, and get government out of the business of marriage regulation. It makes a mess out of everything else it touches, and so seems like the more fitting thing to have marriage be the very personal and spiritual thing it was intended to be instead of the very public thing to be mocked by social deviants that it has become.
Yes, I do like that one better. Not trying to be offensive, but between the satires and the fools flouncing off to “other” sites, I never know what I’m reading any more.
Well, it can't be serious. Don't know why crap like this is posted at all. What gives?
Well written satire should leave you unsure.
Regardless of these other two humorless posters on here, I thought it was funny, and yes even I could tell it was satire.
Marriage is an institution designed to foster the type of environment found to produce the best possible outcome for the children. The societal mores and strictures of traditional marriage are and have always been about the children.
Well now we’re talking epistemology....I’m unsure of everything.
At least....I think I am....
Stopped reading the garbage after reading the first two sentences... =.=
Time to remember that marriage is about reproduction: it takes two of different kinds, one cannot viably/reliable do a good job of it alone, society should persuade the two to raise their offspring (not dumping them upon society at large), and that society at large should facilitate/encourage/enforce that union that the species may continue well.
People are free to pursue happiness as they see fit.
Quality procreation, being vital to society’s continuation, needs some legislative incentives.
It’s not your father’s internet any more!
“...and get government out of the business of marriage regulation....”
Beat me to it! There are so many facets of daily life that are not the governments job. So many of these have become commonly accepted as to make the founders original intent completely incomprehensible to large swaths of the electorate.
government regulation of schools - turns out there was no better way to expedite the march to socialism than through mandated attendance in government sponsored/government-union-run/government-curriculum-approved tovarish factories
government regulation of medicine and doctors - 12 years to get any medicine to market, doctors required to hold usurious malpractice insurance, healthcare versus medicine (read treatment$$$$$ versus CUREs)
Government regulation of the food we eat - The food pyramid, mind numbing, amino acid sapping grains and carbohydrates at the bottom, mind stimulating, amino acid supporting meat at the top......and a nanny mayor regulating the size of a soda....
Government support programs that do not actually support, but are a drain on the government that shouldn’t be in this business at all
Government regulation of the automotive industry - Benjamin Tucker
Government regulation of interpersonal relationships - read commerce, read marriage
All these have become accepted as the role of government, and the huge self sustaining monolithic bureaucracy it becomes.
Back the government out of all of these and watch the American Experiment flourish.
hell its prolly in the bambamcare bill, we just havent 'read it' far enuff yet...
That brings up another idea I had.
Is it time to outlaw natural sex based reproduction too? Nature was very discriminatory in this process, almost hateful.
If we outlawed natural sex based reproduction effectively (maybe an operation on females after birth) it would eliminate unwanted pregnancies and allow the government to regulate births based on social and scientific goals, and 'level the playing field' on diversity of the population.
just a thought.
I’ll say this: it’s head and shoulders above anything John Semmons has ever posted.
I’m not sure at all why the government has to have any say in two people relationship. But the again, I fail to see the need for them to rummage through our pay stubs and bank accounts every year.
It would be literally impossible to outlaw marriage.
I get these crazy ideas from time to time usually on a machine at the gym with MSNBC on, Sharpton was on yesterday.
I continued the thought here: #19
As those of us on the right, continue to let the wordsmiths on the left destroy the meaning of everything, I have begun to use the terms Real Marriage, or Traditional Real Marriage in my conversations to delineate them from the bastardization the left has accomplished to the term Marriage.
The SSAD activists can call a turd gold bullion all they want but it does not change the turd into something of worth.
They can go to the states where deviancy has been declared normal all they want, and have their little fake union ceremonies but that does not make it a Real Traditional Marriage and all the wordsmiths in the world cannot change it.
Stop letting the leftwing wordsmiths define our language.
Choice is killing babies not choice.
Gay is perversion and serves no useful purpose. They are SSAD (same sex attraction disorder).
Same Sex Marriage is cohabitation to falsely obtain benefits reserved for Real Traditional Marriage.
If equal means equal then there is no need for diversity as we are all equal.
Government is generally not the best solution.
In this case, the best alternative would be to start with an ecumenical agreement among conservative and orthodox churches and synagogues to “take back” marriage as a religious activity, outside of the realm of government involvement or control.
This agreement would be very clear as to who could be married, and how. Individual faiths could “add” requirements, but the agreement would be for the minimum.
Likewise, the agreement would also be clear when marriages end, as that would also be under religious control, as would any division of assets or child care agreements.
If individuals rejected this agreement, they would be seen as in variance to the beliefs of their faith, to face whatever sanction that faith permitted.
This would involve some discipline on their part, as they would not only recognize “sacred” marriage done by any of them, but they would have to *not* recognize secular marriage. That is, people married outside of these conservative or orthodox faiths would be considered as “living together” with no religious blessing.
If people with a secular marriage wished to join one of these faiths, they would have to be remarried under its rules, at least administratively.
Importantly, people with a “sacred” marriage could choose to have a secular marriage license as well, or not. Many would choose not if just to avoid the marriage penalty in taxation.
Government would not appreciate having this ability taken from them, and would probably try dirty tricks to force people back into secular marriage by the government’s rules. But far fewer would fall for this, seeing the perfidy of the Obama administration in its treatment of religious beliefs.
But these religions would now have a powerful tool at their disposal:
Under the Federal Fair Housing Acts, marital status is not one of the protected categories under federal law. Thus if they did not recognize secular marriage as marriage, religions, and the people who belong to those religions, could legally discriminate against those they deemed as “unmarried”.
It wouldn’t matter if they were straight or gay, as long as they saw them as “unmarried”, they could be scorned for that reason. The majority of states dont have any legal provisions protecting people from discrimination based on marital status, either.
??? The SCOTUS can do anything they want as they are like Kings.
They outlawed abortion laws in all 50 states based on a single abortion law in one state.
They could reference a foreign country's constitution to support the decision.
I can see you are going to be difficult :) I believe inclusive name is ‘marriage equality’. We all want equality right?
I know two liberals here in Maryland who went ballistic when I used the term “Obama-care’, which is the name (nick-name) that most people know. In fact the WH cut those two off at the knees by selling those “I love obama-care” T-shirts.
In fact I am kind of disappointed. I had a couple of these where a few freepers didnt pick up on it and got very angry and told me I was crazy (and a few names I cant repeat.) So I continued the argument in comments.
That makes it more fun.
The concept of “marriage” is largely a religious one; it only became government’s business when they started creating tax rules around it. Though the tax rules probably created an incentive to marriage, they will now use those same rules to say, “sorry, we can’t be in the marriage business unless ALL can be married.”
Eliminate governmental recognition of marriage. Allow churches to perform marriages however they see fit. They’re meaningful in the eyes of whoever cares. I’m sick of this whole fight, and the bastardisation of a beloved institution. Get it over with already.
I know couples here in Maryland who pay a marriage penalty in the AMT for getting married, go figure.
Here 100K++ is normal for a salary so double that for the married.
Sharpton and lactic acid build up will do that to you. Dangerous combination. Clouds the mind. Sort of like alcohol and barbiturates.
Gold Medal winner Aly Raisman is not responding to my marriage proposals. It’s like she can’t hear me through the TV.
I’m sorry but your proposal doesn’t address the thorny issue of the woman not consenting or even knowing of the existence of the man that wants her. How is that any fairer than traditional marriage?
And it’s super discriminatory by still being limited to 2 people. I’ve also proposed to several women’s volleyball teams.
Hope this helps.
A truly “fair” system would get rid of him for me!
LOL, been there done that...
Ditties. I am sick and tired of attention whores thinking they are wits. Satire should be labeled clearly in the headline so the “humorless” (or maybe those with good taste) can avoid wasted time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.