Same sex marriage

BLM WHM SMN SCH THF RNG BRD MNK WAR DRK PLD > 99

So today I am watching oral arguments in the Supreme Court via CSPAN.  Long ago I SAID that marriage was all about the children and that there was nothing permanent about marriage except the oath.  

Isn't it about time our country DID AWAY with oaths?  I mean noone can truly take an oath to defend our country and be successful at it.  It seems that pledges are more what people should aspire to when "pledging" to serve the country.   

In any case, today we are going to defend marriage in a way.  Ever since I watched the movie "freakonomics" I have wondered at why our country is ridden with crime and in the study in that movie it showed that couples that had unwanted babies in Romania, because the dictator made abortion illegal, spiked in crime because of all of the "bastards" or children born out of broken homes.  And the statistics showed that.  In a similar vein it seems to me that here in America we should all aspire to do the same thing by ABORTING children from fatherless marriages so as to minimize children that grow up to be out of control/criminals(just a thought lol... TAKE THEM AWAY!).  

These arguments however CHANGE how I view those things.  For the first time I am hearing legitimate arguments to bring back marriages based on children and it warms my soul.  I never dreamed people would have enough sense to follow my teachings but it seems it might just happen.  Even if it doesn't the point is to explore the idea right?  All ideas should be welcome.  

Today, Mr Burch I believe first brought to the fore the argument that marriage should be about the children and not about "love".  And if it is about children, then giving marriages to same-sex couples not only limits the amount of couples that can become married, not the least of which are gay, but makes central to our government how pro-creation will be carried forward.  

It's a pontificous moment in our nation's history, especially in light of Citizen's United, when our Supreme Court can re-define what marriage is to include children as a defining characteristic.  Not only would this serve to limit existing couples' birth rates(global warming), but it would "clean" up our society.  Now people looking to get married, hopefully after setting aside a house and college fund, can either get pregnant ON PURPOSE, for the sake of getting that license and hopefully some BEAU COUP tax break that makes our current tax breaks pale by comparison; or, they can adopt one of the MANY children either being raised by bad parents or simply put in a foster home because of some accident or other where they become a ward of the state.  

Think of what this does to our body.  Not only are children raised by people "commited" to their well-being, as well as each others, but the burden of raising children can now be fully appreciated as a central part of our country's prosperity.  

More than that, expect our country to NOT SETTLE for other countries views on this and to limit, as China has, their procreation methods to demand financial responsibility before having a child.  Of course this means that the fat cats will soon raise the price of adoption and housing since people will DEMAND to have these things to prove themselves to their mates.  

Still it's a bold step and it really would be a harsh change to our society.  But it is quite the leap from not caring who gets married to demanding that all marriage be legitimate.  

And think of how this would affect divorce?  Could people even get divorced having made a commitment to a child?  I would daresay it's about time we DID re-define marriage, its time has come.  

Remember also that this affects abortion too.  People that are pro-life should be jumping in with both feet at having this "redefinition of marriage" passed, because abortion would be a moot point if the mother could simply give the child to the state and allow some waiting same-sex couple to be married.  POOF.  Remember also that abortion is a totally new thing.  We have started to legalize it worldwide and it's due in no small part to people UNDERSTANDING that fatherless children grow up to be criminals for the most part.  Children need two parents; ALL things need two centers.  

Remember my analogy of spheres?  All spheres have TWO centers because there are NO perfects spheres.  If the two centers are close then there is stronger gravity, if they are farther apart then there is less.  If the centers become too disparate, the moons or the planets lose their "interest" in revolving around those spheres.  

Our quantum mechanics has shown us how atoms are made, which include neutrons, protons, and revolving around them electrons.  See, TWO centers.  The stronger the TWO centers, like Angelina and Brad, the MORE children they can manage and the happier their children will be.  If they are NOT strong, some of them will be rejects.  

Makes perfect sense, right? 

Ok sidetracked, so remember that we live in a society now where we want to be kind and that can only happen once we conquer the divide.  And that means putting in limits to the wage gap.  If corporations can skip taxes altogether, because we have given accoutants everywhere license to make tax reporting a national pasttime, then we can take all of that away and tax them, remove all accountants, and let married people live FREE of taxes.  

It's not hard, lol.  

But more to the point(chuckle) is that THIS is new.  Allowing gay people to marry will be BRAND new and it will be a mark of distinction, however pernicious or brief it may be to our history.  We are doing what we should however, removing "forbidden" things from society, discussing all things, even gay things openly so as to afford everyone with their chance to speak freely for the sake of our country's well-being.  

Another thing that should be discussed, and this is going to make you cringe, is anal sex.  Gay women are not addicted to each other, like gay men are.  Sodomy is an addiction.  Don't look at me with that tone of VOICE!  Just ask them.  And like most addictions, it can be abused and when abused can be hazardous to your health.  

In time, I hope people will be open to discussing this in public so that the reality of what the process is, can be visited.  I believe it is like cigarettes and by that I mean people should still be allowed to do it, but it should be clear, ESPECIALLY TO OUR YOUTH, that it's "potentially" harmful.  

In any case, no matter who we are talking about, drunk person, drug addict, sex fiend or corrupt politician or corporate welfare guy, or gay persons, all people deserve to be treated with respect... and be afforded our compassion, not our isolationism.  

These people are coming apart and need society's support to fine tune their centers; they should NOT be discarded.