Isn't it funny that when people want to "defend" "marriage", they almost always are talking about one kind of marriage to the exclusion of the others.
Such was the case at the "March for Marriage" held the other day in Washington, DC.
When New York State legalized same-sex marriage in June of 2011, four of the Senate's Republicans voted for it. In doing so, they joined all except one of the Senate's Democrats.
Guess who was at the March? Right...the Senate Democrat, none other than Ruben Diaz Sr., a Pentecostal minister. (Now, what was that about separation of church and state?) He was joined by a contagion of conservative clergy people from his native Bronx, which City Council member Ritchie Torres (who represents part of it) calls "the Bible Belt of New York City".
Some people may genuinely believe that God (or Allah or whomever) deemed that marriage is a relationship of one man and one woman for the purpose of procreation. However, I get the feeling that too many other people--including, I suspect, many in the March--simply don't want gays or other people to have the same rights they have, just as certain white people didn't want racial equality because it would strip them of whatever social and economic superiority they enjoyed vis-à-vis blacks.
Then there are those who seem confused about what it is they're marching for:
Her sign reads: "People are designed to be seeing and hearing and with all body parts intact and 'Tab A fits Slot B' perpetuates the species.
OK. So is she saying that blind or deaf people--or amputees-- shouldn't be allowed to marry? And what's that about 'Tab A' and 'Slot B'? Is she telling us that sex, reproductive or otherwise, is just a matter of getting one piece to fit into another, like a puzzle?
Posts
