Rings and Surthings

I had the weirdest conversation with The Princess*, my new sister-in-law, when she was in town for my husband's birthday. It's taken me this long to write about because I just wasn't sure how to process it. Translation: I don't know her well enough to know if she was deliberately being rude or if she is just really clueless. I'm erring on the side of clueless, though deliberately rude is a definite possibility.

Anyway, she and my brother-in-law have been married less than a year. I generally hate talking to newlyweds, for a lot of reasons**, and she hit two of them in less than five minutes:

Why don't you guys wear wedding rings? Don't you want people to know you're married?

Why didn't you change your last name? Is this some kind of feminist thing?

So, here's my reply to those questions, feel free to borrow whatever is applicable to you any time you'd like.

1. Wedding rings:

Does anybody even know what the point of wedding rings is, anyway? I guess to show people I'm married, but why does every random stranger need to know my marital status? An unmarried person could buy a wedding ring. It's not like jewelry stores require proof of marriage. A married person with a wedding ring could simply take it off. And I'm still not sure why everyone I meet needs to know whether or not I'm married.

I've been told that my husband will cheat on me if I don't require him to wear a wedding ring. I told them I had no idea circles of metal had such amazing powers.

I've been told our refusal to wear wedding rings means we're not serious about one another. I've been known to say "fuck off". Seriously, seriously fuck off. We've stuck together through both of our chronic illnesses, poverty, and other stuff I don't talk about here, and you're telling me that the ring is what denotes serious commitment? C'mere, I wanna show you something. It won't hurt for long.

So why don't we wear wedding rings? Neither one of us likes the tactile sensation of rings. My husband won't wear any jewelry at all, not even a watch. I regularly wear earrings, bracelets, and necklaces (I'm actually rarely without all three), but rings bother me. I can't really see how "Hey, I know wearing a ring makes you wildly uncomfortable, but you must wear one every day for the rest of your life" means love.

2. Taking my husband's surname.

This is not a feminist thing. Well, actually, some feminists do promote this as a feminist thing, but it has nothing to do with feminism for me. I'd like to say it does. I'd like to claim to be a feminist warrior, changing the world through my bold refusal to change my name, but Hell is all about the honesty***.

I didn't change my last name because I didn't really care about it and I'm lazy about things I don't care about. Actually, thinking about it, I had just spent a very frustrating six weeks getting a new social security card so I could switch jobs and the thought of doing that all over again to change my name was just too much at the time, so I put it off. After a few years went by, I asked my husband if he cared that I didn't use his name and he said, quite reasonably, that while I was welcome to use his name, he didn't see why I should. I didn't become a different person when I married him, why should I have a different name? And, it bothers him to see men stay Mr. John Doe, but women become Mrs. John Doe as if she had to marry John Doe because her parents named her Mrs. John Doe. What if she wanted to marry Frank Doe? It would be tragic!

Yeah, he's as weird as I am.

I've been told that this means I don't love him. I've been told this means he'll leave me, cheat on me, be heartbroken. I've been told feminists are ridiculous, that I hate men and that I'm a bad wife.

People seriously froth at the mouth about this one, more so than the rings.

Multiple people have suggested a "compromise" as if we were fighting about it: hyphenate our names. First of all, this always means I change my name to the hyphenate and he does nothing. Secondly, I have a four syllable Scots/Irish name and he has a three syllable Italian name. Can you imagine?

Mrs. Faith O'Hannigan-Agnoli****.

That's better than Faith O'Hannigan?

People often ask what name our children (will) have. My husband agrees that in the highly unlikely event that we do have a child, they will have my name because I'll be the one doing all the work. This upsets people so much that I've suggested we simply combine our names into one unhyphenated, bizarre Iritalian mix. O'Hannoli, perhaps. Nobody finds that funny, other than my husband.

Anyway, I really want to know why are either of these things anyone else's business? Why does anyone at all care whether or not we wear wedding rings or whether or not I change my name? I have asked people that, but apparently, I'm the rude one for asking.



*No, I really don't like her all that much.

**Hey, you're happy, good for you. Stop pretending you know anything about marriage. Call me back in ten years and then we'll talk all about it.

***Carefully edited honesty.

****Not our real names. Our real names would be even worse. And longer. Much longer.

I'm In Ur Feminism Settin' Straw Men on Fire

By popular request (if we are defining Jason as popular, and why not?) I am snarking on . . . ha! A writer for Mad Men. We're taking on the big dogs today in hell, yes we are.

You want to get married. It's taken a while to admit it. Saying it out loud -- even in your mind -- feels kind of desperate, kind of unfeminist, kind of definitely not you, or at least not any you that you recognize. Because you're hardly like those girls on TLC saying yes to the dress and you would never compete for a man like those poor actress-wannabes on The Bachelor.

Kind of unfeminist? I'm beginning to understand why I despise Mad Men, though I do love the costuming. Look, feminists get married all the time. In fact, most people get married. It's what we do here in America. Some of us like it so much, we do it more than once. I was unaware the "girls" say yes to dresses, in that girls are not allowed to marry in the US.

Words: they have meanings. Learn them.

You've never dreamt of an aqua-blue ring box.

Who dreams of an aqua-blue ring box? That's a fetish I've never heard of, and I worked at a porn site for a year.

Then, something happened. Another birthday, maybe. A breakup. Your brother's wedding. His wife-elect asked you to be a bridesmaid, and suddenly there you were, wondering how in hell you came to be 36-years-old, walking down the aisle wearing something halfway decent from J. Crew that you could totally repurpose with a cute pair of boots and a jean jacket. You started to hate the bride -- she was so effing happy -- and for the first time ever you began to have feelings about the fact that you're not married. You never really cared that much before. But suddenly (it was so sudden) you found yourself wondering... Deep, deep breath... Why you're not married.

Well, I know why.

Projection, you have a call on line 1. Projection, line 1.

How? It basically comes down to this: I've been married three times. Yes, three. To a very nice MBA at 19; a very nice minister's son at 32 (and pregnant); and at 40, to a very nice liar and cheater who was just like my dad, if my dad had gone to Harvard instead of doing multiple stints in federal prison.

Issues: Tracy McMillan has them. Alternatively, you're not married because Tracy married all the men.

I was, for some reason, born knowing how to get married. Growing up in foster care is a big part of it. The need for security made me look for very specific traits in the men I dated -- traits it turns out lead to marriage a surprisingly high percentage of the time. Without really trying to, I've become a sort of jailhouse lawyer of relationships -- someone who's had to do so much work on her own case that I can now help you with yours.

Okay, I do understand that people get very caught up in the dress and the ceremony and the fab party afterwards, but most people don't just want to get married, they want to stay married. While Tracy can surely tell us how to get married, she clearly has no idea how to stay that way.

But I won't lie. The problem is not men, it's you. Sure, there are lame men out there, but they're not really standing in your way. Because the fact is -- if whatever you're doing right now was going to get you married, you'd already have a ring on it. So without further ado, let's look at the top six reasons why you're not married.

It's never the men! Men are perfect darlings just looking to slip a ring on anyone's finger. If you're not married, it's not because you don't want to be, or haven't found the person you want to wake up to when you're 90, it's because you have problems. Problems that Tracy can solve- three times!

1. You're a Bitch.
Here's what I mean by bitch. I mean you're angry. You probably don't think you're angry. You think you're super smart, or if you've been to a lot of therapy, that you're setting boundaries. But the truth is you're pissed. At your mom. At the military-industrial complex. At Sarah Palin. And it's scaring men off.

The deal is: most men just want to marry someone who is nice to them. I am the mother of a 13-year-old boy, which is like living with the single-cell protozoa version of a husband. Here's what my son wants out of life: macaroni and cheese, a video game, and Kim Kardashian. Have you ever seen Kim Kardashian angry? I didn't think so. You've seen Kim Kardashian smile, wiggle, and make a sex tape. Female anger terrifies men. I know it seems unfair that you have to work around a man's fear and insecurity in order to get married -- but actually, it's perfect, since working around a man's fear and insecurity is big part of what you'll be doing as a wife.

Pretend to be someone you're not- every day for the next 50 fucking years. Smile, wiggle and sex it up, and never, ever, ever admit that rape culture and patriarchy make you the slightest bit testy. Because the menz, they are askurred!

2. You're Shallow.
When it comes to choosing a husband, only one thing really, truly matters: character. So it stands to reason that a man's character should be at the top of the list of things you are looking for, right? But if you're not married, I already know it isn't. Because if you were looking for a man of character,you would have found one by now. Men of character are, by definition, willing to commit.

Instead, you are looking for someone tall. Or rich. Or someone who knows what an Eames chair is. Unfortunately, this is not the thinking of a wife. This is the thinking of a teenaged girl. And men of character do not want to marry teenaged girls. Because teenage girls are never happy. And they never feel like cooking, either.

Character is what's important in men, but women should smile, wiggle and sex it up. Mmm-hmmm.

3. You're a Slut.
Hooking up with some guy in a hot tub on a rooftop is fine for the ladies of Jersey Shore -- but they're not trying to get married. You are. Which means, unfortunately, that if you're having sex outside committed relationships, you will have to stop. Why? Because past a certain age, casual sex is like recreational heroin -- it doesn't stay recreational for long.

That's due in part to this thing called oxytocin -- a bonding hormone that is released when a woman a) nurses her baby and b) has an orgasm -- that will totally mess up your casual-sex game. It's why you can be f**k-buddying with some dude who isn't even all that great and the next thing you know, you're totally strung out on him. And you have no idea how it happened. Oxytocin, that's how it happened. And since nature can't discriminate between marriage material and Charlie Sheen, you're going to have to start being way more selective than you are right now.

Women are sluts and men are studs. And made of character. And you need to smile and wiggle and sex it up- but not too much or the science will come and get you.

4. You're a Liar.

I don't need to copy anything but the heading here. I'm supposed to smile, wiggle, sex it up, but not too much, and pretend that I totally don't care what he looks like- and never, ever lie. Yeah, patriarchy is totally fun. Don't get angry, bitch.

5. You're Selfish.
If you're not married, chances are you think a lot about you. You think about your thighs, your outfits, your naso-labial folds. You think about your career, or if you don't have one, you think about doing yoga teacher training. Sometimes you think about how marrying a wealthy guy -- or at least a guy with a really, really good job -- would solve all your problems.

Howevs, a good wife, even a halfway decent one, does not spend most of her day thinking about herself. She has too much s**t to do, especially after having kids. This is why you see a lot of celebrity women getting husbands after they adopt. The kids put the woman on notice: Bitch, hello! It's not all about you anymore! After a year or two of thinking about someone other than herself, suddenly, Brad Pitt or Harrison Ford comes along and decides to significantly other her. Which is also to say -- if what you really want is a baby, go get you one. Your husband will be along shortly. Motherhood has a way of weeding out the lotharios.

My thighs obsess me! Because I am girl, but once I have a baybeez, I will learn to be a better human being- but don't forget to smile, wiggle and sex it up, but not too much. And don't lie!

6. You're Not Good Enough.
Oh, I don't think that. You do. I can tell because you're not looking for a partner who is your equal. No, you want someone better than you are: better looking, better family, better job.

Here is what you need to know: You are enough right this minute. Period. Not understanding this is a major obstacle to getting married, since women who don't know their own worth make terrible wives. Why? You can fake it for a while, but ultimately you won't love your spouse any better than you love yourself. Smart men know this.

Fuck you, Tracy! Which is it? Am I supposed to fake being happy, wiggle and smile, sex it up, but not too much, or am I supposed to be myself? FUCKING PICK ONE! I HATE YOU WITH THE FIERY PASSION OF A THOUSAND SUNS!

Ouch. My chest hurts after that one. I should get hazard pay for that kind of shit.

Put Down the Stupid, Ma'am

This is weapons grade stupid right here. So fucking stupid I'm losing brain function thinking about it. So fucking stupid I would think the writer would have been rendered catatonic, except that she's posted blog entries since, so the only conclusion I can draw is that homophobes are so saturated in stupid they have become immune to it.

If you think that sounds unnecessarily mean, keep reading. Just don't complain when you find yourself unable to do basic math or find the US on a map afterwards. I warned you.

(The following is supposed to be the result of DADT being repealed. Keep that in mind. The following is the result of a ruling that allows gays in the military to openly discuss their partners, just like their heterosexual compatriots have always been allowed to.)

Scene: Military base, mess hall. Several male soldiers are seated around a table.

Soldier A: So, yeah, then I got a call from my...

(He pauses, and looks down at the table.)

Soldier A: Sorry.

Soldier B: No problem. You were saying?

Soldier A: Yeah, I was on the phone and she said...wait, can I say that?

Soldier C: Um, I think so.

Soldier B: No, actually. You can tell us what you heard--no pronouns.

Soldier A: Right. Well, anyway...well...oh, forget it.

(There is silence. A female soldier enters and joins them.)

Soldier D: Hi, guys. Why so quiet?

Soldier A: (glumly) Oh...you know.

Soldier D: Let me guess. The Military Personnel Conversational Restriction Act?

Soldier B: Mmm-hmm.

Soldier C: Better know as the Just Shut Up Already Act.

If you are still able, please consider this for a moment. This fucking idiot truly believes that a gay soldier being allowed to say, "I talked to my boyfriend last night" without being kicked out of the military will lead to all soldiers being unable to talk about anything.

I'd ask how fucking stupid any one person can be, but there it is. That fucking stupid.

One Poisons the Other

The atheist position on religion and politics is that religion poisons politics, bringing to the political realm goals and ideas that have no business in the politics of a secular democracy such as the United States.

I think, given this, that perhaps the Christian position on religion and politics should be the opposite side of the same coin: politics poisons religion, bringing to religion goals and ideas that have no business in the realm of Christianity.

Case in point:

I have no idea how this will play out, and as the non-Mormon on this blog to some extent it is none of my business, but last week one of the Mormon elders “apologized” to some pro-gays in Oakland

. . .

It is made clear by every one I have read on this that it is NOT and apology for Prop 8 or for Mormon doctrine on homosexuality, but rather an apology for the pain felt.

Okay, it's a start. I'm inclined to snark, am desperately holding back some truly nasty comments, but perhaps this is sincere. Perhaps, beginning from a point of recognizing, and apologizing for, the pain caused by Prop 8 and Mormon doctrine, more can come. I doubt it, but beneath my cynicism is an idealism that gives me hope. And frequently gets viciously beaten down by reality, but that's another story.

Beyond that, if you've ever read the Bible, which Mormons at least nominally follow, this apology is within the teachings of Christ. Politics, however, demand a different path:

I do not know if I would make such a generalization about Monson, but I will say this was a huge political gaffe for the CJCLDS. There is an old phrase, “Never apologize, it makes you look weak.” It’s not the most Christian of phrases as confession lies at the heart of who we are, but it sure applies to politics. If mistakes were made, you find a way to correct them, but politically you have to do so from a position of strength.

A less Christ-like approach I could not imagine. Apparently, neither can the author, but politics, once adopted as a goal, soon becomes the goal. It's isn't about making America moral and safe for hetero-only marriage, it's about winning. And, as a wise man once said, winning isn't everything, it's the only thing, and that leaves very little room for the teachings of a savior.

All of which leaves me with one conclusion: anyone who combines religion with politics cares very little indeed for religion.

Be Careful What You Wish For

I just know I'm going to end up snarking on something when the title makes me giggle.

My Spouse Struggles with Homosexuality from Focus on the Family

No, your spouse is gay, which is certainly unfortunate, unless you're in a same sex marriage, in which case, that's exactly what you wanted.

One of seven children, Paula was raised on the mission field. She witnessed her parents live by faith and sacrifice a normal family life and worldly possessions for the sake of the gospel. She grew up following their example of loving Jesus and committing her life to Him in service. In Bible College she met Steven. He, too, had a fervent and growing faith. The two of them fell in love and embarked on a life-long journey together in ministry.

Why is it that if a woman works, it's so horrible that she's sacrificing her to daycare, but raising your children on the mission field (i.e., in a third world country without clean water or health care) is just fantastic?

Paula never saw it coming. At the time, Steven was the beloved senior pastor of a 1,000 member church. They had a 7 year-old daughter. Paula says there were no outward signs that pointed to a homosexual struggle in Steven, just a growing uneasy feeling inside of her. Paula held Steven up before the Lord and prayed fervently that God would reveal what was wrong with her husband. She believes that God told her through prayer that Steven struggled with homosexuality.

Um, wow. It's bad enough when someone decides your cheating on them due to a misinterpreted phone call, email or encounter, can you imagine your spouse deciding that you must be cheating based on what god told them during prayer? Of course, in her case, she probably noticed that Steven spend more time checking out other men's asses than other women's asses, but still.

Her worst fears were confirmed when Steven was spotted in a gay bar. Paula's world collapsed.

I feel bad for Paula- and Steven. This is what fundamentalist Christianity, the kind that FotF promotes, does to people. Neither Paual nor Steven would have been in this position if religion hadn't convinced Steven to pretend to be something he's not. Steven could have married some nice man that he was actually sexually attracted to, and Paula could have married some nice man that was actually sexually attracted to her. Everybody would have been happy, but no, that's not what Christianity is about.

Perhaps you have an uneasy, sick feeling that something is wrong with your marriage. Perhaps communication has broken down between the two of you and you suspect infidelity. And perhaps you have discovered questionable e-mail, or sexually explicit ads pop up when you're surfing the internet.

Sexually explicit ads popping up when you're online is a sign that you are online.

Pam Burnett realized something was amiss when her husband began spending more and more time away from home, distancing himself from her and the kids. She says he also took up running and started to pay an inordinate amount of attention to his physical appearance.

Oh, those silly gays and their always looking good! That is, btw, the symptom of any affair, hetero or gay. People having affairs want to look good for their lovers, no matter what sex they are.

But for Pam, Paula and others there could have been red flags all along. In his book When Homosexuality Hits Home, Joe Dallas says that many women are attracted to the sensitivity, astute communication skills, vulnerability and easily expressed emotions that often embody temperament commonly found in homosexual men. And that the lack of sexual aggression first seen as a desirable trait may just be a lack of normal sexual interest.

Well now that's interesting. The reason a lack of sexual interest (aggression is a bit disturbing in this context) is seen as a positive to these people is because fundyism is so obsessed with female virginity. Contrary to popular fundy belief, however, women do have an interest in sex and do enjoy sex, therefore maintaining virginity is very difficult. Hence the rather high teen mother/abortion statistics in the fundy community. So, if you're in this community and don't want to fall prey to temptation, it makes absolute sense to seek out men who are not interested in sex. Especially considering that sex is generally made out to be an embarrassing, dirty, evil thing. If that's what you think of sex, you wouldn't want a man interested in sex. To be honest, I think the percentage of women in fundyland married to men who have no sexual interest in them- or any other woman- is pretty high.

Of course, it wouldn't be FotF if they didn't imply that positive traits, like sensitivity, astute communication skills, vulnerability and easily expressed emotions, are gay/womanly and traits that men shouldn't have. That's right, boys, do you express emotion easily, are you able to open up to the woman you love? Well that's because you're gay.

At Focus on the Family we regularly hear from women who fall into lesbianism when emotionally unhealthy relationships with other women become sexualized.

Because women aren't born liking women, we "fall into lesbianism", probably because of trauma.

Mike knows the pain involved in finding his wife involved with another woman. "Jane still lived in the house with me and the kids, but she became someone I didn't know. The sweet girl I married became a creature of deep, seething, unpredictable rage. We fought loud and often. She worked long hours and often didn't come home. She began a 'ministry' at the gay bar three blocks from the hospital where she was charge nurse." Jane's unrest at home, and unresolved issues from her past, deteriorated into submersion into the gay lifestyle.

Bingo! Jane wasn't gay, she has resolved issues from her past. She's also seething and unpredictable and filled with rage. A "creature", in fact.

Let's see how we can tell if our spouses are gay:

In addition to the ominous feeling that something is wrong, there are a number of telltale signs that your partner might be struggling with same-sex attraction or having a homosexual affair:

None of these indicate homosexuality, what they do indicate is any affair. I guess screwing the nanny is okay as long as your nanny isn't gay.

1. Growing emotional distance between you and your spouse
2. Decreased sexual interest in you over time
3. Behavior that does not add up; inconsistencies in details
4. Withdrawn, depressed, moody, outbursts of anger
5. Spend late nights or great amounts of time on the internet
6. Internet web browser history lists unusual sites
7. Preoccupation with physical appearance that has nothing to do with you
8. Eyes meet with those of strangers in public
9. Claims of working long hours at work or periods of unaccounted time
10. Secretive with the cell phone. Looks for incoming calls at odd hours.
11. Becomes defensive when you ask questions about time or whereabouts
12. Unexplained payments on bank statements.
13. Asks about your schedule more than usual
14. Phone records disappear, bank and credit card statements redirected to work address

Now that you've hung a label on your suspicions, you may be feeling a deep sense of betrayal, sorrow, and fear. It's time to confront your spouse and find out the truth.

I wonder how many very interesting conversations are happening in fundy households right now.

Consequences of Gay Marriage

from GraphJam

Strawman, Strawman, Strawman- Poof! I'm Right!*

You know what's easier than logical argumentation involving research and facts? Illogical, emotional, inflammatory nonsense!

I recently listened again to an excellent speech that comedian and author Evan Sayet gave at a gathering of the Heritage Foundation. The speech, entitled "Hating What's Right: How the Modern Liberal Winds Up on the Wrong Side of Every Issue"reminded me of some salient points when looking at the ideology behind modern liberalism. (If you've never watched the speech, take a look at the end of the post.)

Referring to Allan Bloom's seminal work The Closing of the American Mind, Sayet reminds us of Bloom's observation that modern liberalism relies on the ideal of indiscriminateness in direct opposition to the liberal Satan of discrimination. As Bloom puts it, "indiscriminateness is a moral imperative"in the ideology of modern liberalism (pg. 30).

Modern liberalism finds discrimination, any form of discrimination, to be antithetical to modern liberal thought. We must not discriminate against race, we are morally compelled (by political correctness) not to discriminate against culture, lifestyle, moral behavior or indeed any action deemed ideologically pure.

Gee, did I not get the memo on ideological purity? The above is a load of nonsense flavored with sophistry. The English language is, at best, imprecise. "To discriminate" can mean a few things, some of them acceptable- she has discriminating taste- some of them unacceptable- they discriminate against minorities. Then there are things that could certainly be defined, loosely, as discrimination: refusing to hire a 3 time embezzler as your accountant, for example. No one would, in common parlance, refer to that as discrimination, but technically, the word is defined that way. All of which lends itself beautifully to sophistry, an artful play of language to obfuscate meaning and logic.

What Euripides is doing above is engaging in a such sophistry, blurring the line between acceptable and unacceptable, redefining the common parlance and generally obscuring meaning. I'll save you all an entire semester's worth of studying logical argumentation: If you have to redefine words to make your point, you don't have one. (See how good I am to you?)

So, what sorts of bigotry, oh, I'm sorry, let's just call it "roses", does Euripides wish to engage in? The usual.

Airport Security
Even though we know, we know, that a certain brand of young, male, Muslims are responsible for 9/11 and other airplane hijackings and terrorist activities, we must not discriminate, in fact we must be stupidly indiscriminate at airports, taking away rights from everyone during security checks in order to appear not to discriminate against any one.

Why do we do this? Besides the leftist moral imperative of indiscriminateness, we give up our rights so we might not hurt others' feelings or "profile" unsuspecting Muslims. In fact, we must become stupid in our indiscrimination.

Yeah. Because nobody but a Muslim man . . . um, what does a Muslim man look like, exactly? Muslim refers to a religion, not a race. It's not like they're all purple or something. Heck, I could become a Muslim right now. (I probably would if I got to be purple!) Oh, a "certain brand" of Muslim man. Ayrabs, you see. Which is kind of funny, because there are Afghani Muslims and they aren't . . . oh, never mind. We just need to stop searching white people at the airport. It's so obnoxious for blondie. (Seriously, take a look at his profile pic. If he gets any whiter, he'll glow.)

Never mind that racial profiling doesn't work. Why should reality get in the way of Euripides' roses?

Arizona Immigration
Speaking of racial profiling, the loud-mouthed leftists who jumped on the ideological bandwagon, lost no time at all in condemning Arizona's new immigration law because it failed the liberal test of indiscriminateness. Once again, liberals demand that we make ourselves stupid in order to avoid the Mortal Sin of discrimination.

Let's have no doubts, racial discrimination has indeed produced social and legal injustices. However, in their zeal for an indiscriminate society, leftist liberals would have us stupidly ignore illegal immigration or illegal activity in order to uphold an ideological belief instead of exercising common sense. We must be indiscriminate to the point of stupidity.

Nobody said that liberals want to ignore illegal immigration, Euripides. See, this is what we call a false dichotomy. Either we accept a flawed, bigoted law or we just throw open our borders and wait for everything to burn down. There are other options. Lots of them. But reasoned discussion doesn't allow you to call whole groups of people stupid!

Same Sex Marriage
The ultimate in indiscrimination is the leftists invented the ideal of same sex marriage or gay marriage. If discrimination is the Mortal Sin of modern society, then the ultimate discriminate conclusion is that there are any differences at all between men and women. The indiscriminate liberal logically concludes that if we must not discriminate, then we cannot discriminate between the sexes and hence, traditional marriage is a meaningless institution, destined only to become an indiscriminate union.

We must stupidly ignore the differences and complimentary nature of the sexes in order to support a redefinition of marriage to conform to the ideology based on indiscriminateness.

Considering that you completely redefined "marriage" to arrive at this point (marriage as it is today hasn't been around that long), I fail to see the issue here. Oh, and prove "complimentary nature of the sexes" without referencing NOM. Or the Book of Mormon. It's easy to win if you assume x is true and then move on to y and z, but we really should establish x first. Plus, TEH GHEY IZ BAD! isn't really logic.

Sex Education
According to modern liberal ideology, we cannot teach children not to have sex. That's discrimination. We must, instead, stupidly support an indiscriminate system that rewards children for their own indiscriminate sexual activity, despite any consequences of disease, pregnancy, or abortion. In fact, the system actually promotes the lack of self-control by removing, decriminalizing, and in the case of abortion, actively supporting the lack of consequences.

Dude, when could you ever teach children not to have sex? Srsly. My mother graduated high school in 1961. Girls were getting pregnant out of wedlock back then, too. It's nothing new. What I object to is people who have no knowledge of how their bodies work, how to prevent pregnancy, how to prevent the spread of disease going out and having sex anyway, cuz that's what they do. Abstinence only education led to a rise in teen pregnancy, asshat. You can't stop people from having sex, you can just make it more dangerous.

Modern liberals cannot understand other ideologies or moral systems, for the simple fact that the modern liberal ideology holds indiscriminateness as the Holy Grail of some fantastical utopian society. To comply with the moral imperative of indiscrimination, we must make ourselves stupid in order to comply with the moral imperative of liberal indiscriminateness.

None of the above is true, but strawmen are fun to set ablaze, I admit.

*h/t to [redacted]

pic link

Universal Healthcare = Universal Divorce

"Obama gave me healthcare and now I'm leaving your ass!"

I really have to wonder about the state of other people's marriages. I also really have to wonder if some people just don't realize how much of themselves they reveal when they predict/complain about certain things.





Take, for example, The Playful Walrus' latest screed on same sex marriage and healthcare reform:

Advocates for neutering state marriage licensing have argued that it is
necessary so someone can be added to their same-sex partner's health insurance
and for hospital visitation.

However, it is now being established by federal
legislation that 1. the federal government can dictate the smalled details of
health care, and 2. everyone will have health insurance.

So now a neutered
marriage license is not necessary to obtain those things health insurance or
hospital visitation.

Of course, there will now be less incentive for people
in general to marry or work out conflicts and stay married, or care about
keeping their jobs, for that matter.

The government continues to become a
parent/spouse/pastor, to the detriment of the family.

Now I have to wonder, is The Playful Walrus fully aware that his wife is only sticking around for the health care and is now free to run!, run like the wind!, or is this just a vague suspicion in the back of his mind?

Not a Family

bigotry, gay, marriage, traditional, same sex,
"Traditional marriage" advocates keep running into the same problem: how to define "family/marriage" in a way that excludes gays, but doesn't piss off childless heteros, like me. See, you don't want to get into the issue of "well, families only include children", because then you have to field questions like, "okay then, should we test people's fertility before allowing them to marry? what about older married couples in which the wife is menopausal and can no longer have children- should we force them to divorce? not allow older people to marry at all?"

Eventually, if you start arguing that family=children, but don't exclude infertile or deliberately childless hetero marriages, you have to admit that you just don't like gay people. Thusly:

The family is not easy to define, but I define it as group that includes dependents, children.

So, my family is not a family, as it does not include children. However, looking at the above, we could easily define a gay commune that includes children as a family.

Ah well, it's not like clear thinking is a desirable trait amongst bigots. Oh, Opine Editorials, you never fail to amuse.

An Affront to Democracy

fail, democracy, free speech, same sex, marriage, gay, traditional, mccain,

Good Sense Politics is deeply concerned about the state of democracy. Yes, democracy itself. Apparently, if Cindy McCain supports same sex marriage, democracy just disappears. Possibly leaving a hole in the very fabric of space time itself, though (s)he didn't specify.

Cindy and Meghan McCain have been published in ads supporting the overthrow of California's democratically approved proposition 8. Not only is this an affront on traditional marriage, but on the very foundations of democracy and free speech.

Apparently, rich people supporting same sex marriage will . . . um, yeah, I dunno. I mean, if challenging established laws is an affront to democracy, well, then . . . it's not actually democracy. That's how democracy works. The people have the right to change existing laws. That is, in fact, the very basis of democracy.

As for free speech, I'm not sure how the McCains' use of their right to free speech is an affront to free speech. I keep rereading the First Amendment, and there's nothing in there about it being limited to speech that agrees with anyone in particular. So, fail and fail.

Does anyone get the impression that most of the people bleating about protecting democracy and free speech don't actually like democracy and free speech?

BWAHAHAHAHAHA

James H at the Opinionated Catholic is concerned about the dark side of rights. You see, he fears that if gay marriage becomes legal, then people opposed to homosexuality and gay rights will suddenly be unable to find jobs, find housing, adopt children or keep their own, and will generally be marginalized.

In other words, he is afraid of being treated exactly the same way gays are currently being treated in this country. Apparently, gays being marginalized is the correct order of things, homophobes being marginalized is Teh Rong.

You know what, James? I'm over here just crying for you Argentina.

Emboldened

marriage, traditional, gay, kern, christian,

I knew two things about Prop 8* passing in California: (1) antigay bigotry was going to get a huge boost, and (2) the Religious Right would be emboldened by their victory, and that would mean nothing good for the rest of us, gay or straight or whatever.

And lo, behold I am become a prophet . . . which is really going to crimp the whole atheism thing.

An Oklahoma state legislator plans to introduce an act that would make some divorces illegal.

Scheduled for introduction in the 2010 legislative session by state Rep. Sally Kern, R-Oklahoma City, House Bill 2279 would restrict the "use of incompatibility as a ground for divorce" in Oklahoma.

The bill would not allow for divorce on the basis of incompatibility if:

There are living minor children of the marriage
The parties have been married 10 years or longer
Either party files a written objection to the granting of a divorce

They are feeling their oats, now aren't they? I'm not really sure why this bastion of marriage protection would limit herself this way. The 10 years or longer rule is particularly weird. And that last bit will result in bitter spouses maintaining a marriage they have no particular interest in purely to prevent other spouse from remarrying, which I'm pretty sure is not protecting marriage in any substantive way.

Hey, we allowed them to tell us who could marry, and now they've moved on to who can divorce. You do indeed reap what you sow.


*Prop 8 banned gay marriage in California. It was passed in 2008.

I'm Told This Is Not a Poe

big love, polygamy, christian, marriage,
I'm not sure I believe it. (I'm not calling you a liar, [redacted2], but wow, it's a little unbelievable.) I just can't quite believe this website, which is basically a polygamy dating site, is not a poe. The idea is just mind boggling.

Before you attempt to even read anything on the page, run your mouse over the options to the left. Each option is bullet pointed by a kneeling woman icon. As you mouse passes over an option, the kneeling woman bows. It's . . . it's . . . words fail me.

So, why should I sign up with this dating service? Apparently, the possibilities are endless.

Does friendship have to end in high school or even college? Women with college degrees are increasingly finding it difficult to find men at executive levels that are not married. They feel pressure to marry one of their college classmates even though they're much more attracted to older more experienced men (as in life experience.) Because of this, some women are opting for retaining their friendships and entering that search for a lifetime partner together. Join our list of searching women by visiting ChristianMarriage.com or by filling out the contact form on this website. You might be surprised to find out that your best friend would share a husband with you. Good friends are hard to find. Why leave yours behind.

Wouldn't it just be easier to have sex with my best friend and leave the third party out of it? Also, if this is my BFF, shouldn't I know already how she would feel about polygamy? Why do I need yours services?

Maybe you've been more of a loner but are open to the idea of a polygamous union. You may simply not be prepared to settle (as in settle for less than you've been expecting all your life.) This is a malady common to the beautiful as well as the educated. You've been brought up to expect a super successful exec to sweep you off your feet. There is no reason that can't still happen if you open your eyes to the possibility for matching yourself with a much married man.

So, I'm beautiful, educated, and living in a very peculiar Disney Princess movie, apparently.

There are others for whom the perfect match seems to be as bounteous as their own imagination. Are you what some Americans might call a "mail order bride?" If so, don't count on those anxious foreigners to be the prince charming you imagine them to be. Many of the men seeking wives from Asia have personality defects that are not easily detectable via letters or e-mail. It's a custom in many Asian nations for well moneyed men to have secret wives. You can find out what it's like to have a man who does not try to hide you but who is the kind of man that secret wives get; a strong breadwinner, gracious, adoring, and full of energy. It's a fact that the best men are indeed taken but I can assure you that many of them are waiting to meet someone like you. Maybe you're not a college type at all and don't have a career path in mind. A polygamous household might be just the thing the Lord has planned for you. Polygamists, for obvious reasons, don't parade their wives around town as the monogamists do. We value who our women are and have a healthy desire for them. We're not interested in what desires they might induce in other men. There is no reason for any man to parade his wife about like a harlot. Respect for a woman is demonstrated by a calm and patient temperament. I'm sure you can understand that most men who enter polygamous unions have a tremendous amount of patience or they would have no interest in having even one wife.

That paragraph is . . . um . . . mail order . . . and then . . . taking your wife to dinner is parading her about like a harlot? I . . . >_< . . . patience . . . respect? This is like a missive from an alternate universe in which James Kirk married Uhura, the green chick and Spock.

Maybe you're from the Brethren, Mennonites, Anabaptists, or a woman that simply has conservative values. If so, you're likely more suited than you think to be part of a polygamous household. Women such as yourself find it a comfort knowing that they don't have to complete college to be accepted as "real women" and they can enjoy the freedom that is the envy of women's libbers. Imagine being part of a household that includes more women than men. You can leave your children for the day without worries. You can spend an afternoon at a coffee shop or the mall without any worries about the well being of your children. In general, women in polygamous households have fewer responsibilities than women in "nuclear two parent families." Obviously it is much easier to cook dinner or do the laundry if you have help and in a polygamous household there is plenty of help. Are you such a woman? Join our list of searching women by visiting ChristianMarriage.com and placing a personal ad.

Wait, aren't I a harlot if I go out in public? Now I'm hanging out in coffee shops looking all chic while my best friend or whatever does the laundry? Are these the writers of Big Love?

It's a fact that the best men are indeed taken but I can assure you that many of them are waiting to meet someone like you. You'll be surprised at how many women share your beliefs that a conservative household with lots of children and lots of wives for the husband is the best way to provide a happy and healthy environment for your children. There simply are no latch key kids in polygamous households. Every child is cared for and loved..

I'll just stick with a good daycare, thanks.

The Kids Are Alright

children, gay, marriage, traditional, same sex,
For all the traditional marriage advocates' hysterical shrieking about The Children, it turns out the children of gay couples end up the same as the children of hetero couples. Much ado about nothing, as usual.

In most ways, the accumulated research shows, children of same-sex parents are not markedly different from those of heterosexual parents. They show no increased incidence of psychiatric disorders, are just as popular at school and have just as many friends. While girls raised by lesbian mothers seem slightly more likely to have more sexual partners, and boys slightly more likely to have fewer, than those raised by heterosexual mothers, neither sex is more likely to suffer from gender confusion nor to identify themselves as gay.

Reality: infinity, Traditional Marriage Advocates: 0

Poor People as Bargaining Chips

catholic, church, gay, marriage, poverty,
I really didn't think the Catholic Church could disgust me any further after the "we hid pedophile priests and enabled them to gain access to even more victims" scandal, but the Church has apparently rededicated itself to the disgrace limbo.

The District of Columbia is considering allowing same sex marriage in the District. While no church in DC would actually have to marry gay couples, they would have to extend benefits to spouses of both straight and gay marriages.

No, really, that's what the fight is about. Extending benefits to spouses. No, the Catholic Church is not fighting this on financial grounds. If they would end up employing so many married gay couples that extending benefits to the spouses would bankrupt the Church in DC, I might understand the argument, but apparently, giving health insurance to a gay man's husband (not the gay man himself, they're already doing that) will land you in hell. Or something.

What was the Catholic Church's response? Threatening to cut off charitable services to tens of thousands of DC's most desperate citizens. These poor people have absolutely nothing to do with what DC's governing body intends to do. In fact, the poorest of the poor are those least able to influence policy.

The Catholic Church will spank them anyway. During the worst economic climate in years, in the midst of terrible unemployment and rampant foreclosures, the Catholic Church finds it moral to punish the least of its brothers for the actions of others.

I don't understand this at all. I find it despicable, repugnant, disgusting. And I'm the immoral atheist. Huh.

Reaping What Others Sow

hatred, bigotry, traditional, marriage, gay, same sex, dna, ufi,

Since the beginning, traditional marriage advocates have claimed that preventing gays from marrying has nothing to do with bigotry against gays. "We like the gays! They're our friends! We just don't think they should get to marry."

Bullshit.

Now that bigotry is law in Maine, the true face of traditional marriage has come out into the open. It's not pretty.

goinbroke of kingfield, ME

Nov 11, 2009 9:37 AM

Does anyone know where we can get window stickers that indicate that this particular business is not homosexual friendly? think of it as an anti-rainbow flag. It's about time we "came out" and let the homosexuals from away know how Mainers feel about seeing their sick side show act in our cities and towns.

See above, goinbroke. We did that for many years in this country, to blacks, hispanics, and the irish to name a few. It's something we used to be ashamed of. We still should be ashamed.

Chinook of portland, ME

Nov 8, 2009 9:41 PM
goinbroke of kingfield, ME Nov 8, 2009 8:51 PM

Bob, ... ...Also the next time you are in a business or a resturant and are waited on by some flaming gay guy or lesbian, ask for another server. Simple enough as the customer has the right to be "uncomfortable" as they say. Nothing personal just go away. Mainers can vote with their pocketbook and the homosexuals will get the message and leave. This happens all the time in San Francisco.----------

(What does a "flaming lesbian" look like? I'm unable to picture that.) So, people in San Francisco leave restaurants when the waiter is gay? All the time? Nobody eats out in San Fran, I guess. Also, if you ask for another server in that situation, I sincerely hope the cook wipes his ass with your food, because spitting in your food doesn't quite seem enough.

I very much fear that gays in Maine will soon be reaping what people like the DNA, UFI, the Catholic Church, the Mormons, et al. have sown: hatred. The bigots have won, and now they feel free to put up "No Gays Allowed" posters and refuse to interact with them in public. We can all guess what happens next, and I will be holding each and every one of you bigots personally responsible.

UPDATE: Are you missing valuable opportunities to express your bigotry while barbecuing, walking your dog or just breathing? Then buy one of these lovely MAN + WOMAN ONLY tshirts, aprons or doggy shirts!

Somebody keep me away from the internet before I do myself harm.