Gay Marriage Ruling
As I’m sure you’ve heard by now, the hippie-dippy California Supreme Court ruled yesterday that same-sex couples have a constitutional right to marry, destroying all that is good and sacred in a 4-3 decision.
That’s right, in a blatant display of judicial activism, the California Supreme Court, dominated by Republican appointees, has taken the dysfunctional and failed construction of marriage and proceeded to cram it down the throats of the gay community.
It disgusts me. Hiding behind the California constitution, Chief Justice Ronald M. George proclaimed in the majority opinion “everyone must marry—even if you have only dated for two years and are not a sharing toothbrush—because it’s not fair that only heterosexual couples are saddled with the burden and broken convention that is the American marriage.”
My heart goes out to the gay community as it must now carry the dead weight of marriage, too. The statistics show that only 50 percent of marriages succeed. I mean, would you go to a doctor that offers the correct diagnosis only half the time? Absolutely not. But now we’re insisting the gay community embrace our derailed Victorian-era idea of true love and matrimony. I know, I witnessed my parents’ marriage.
Unfortunately for me, my folks didn’t divorce until after I graduated from high school. For years, I experienced firsthand the realities of marriage, the challenges of communicating, careers, and carpools, and it has left me with more anxiety than Zoloft knows what to do with. It’s a daily struggle. Thank you for your prayers.
Immediately after the ruling came down, California politicians began pandering to the powerful pro-marriage lobby. Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said that he, himself, would officiate ceremonies, declaring, “It's been a long journey to reach this historic day. . . . This is about people and the right for people to love who they want.” Yeah sure, buddy. This champion of loving marriages is in the midst of a messy divorce after an affair with a local television reporter.
And then Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger chimed in, declaring, “I respect the court's decision, and as governor, I will uphold its ruling.” Come on, Arnold! If you’re truly the Governator, you don’t need to respect anything, not even marriage.
I must say, among all this gay rah-rah over civil rights, it’s good to see Minnesota’s own governor decrying the pitfalls of marriage. Why, just this past weekend Gov. Pawlenty told WCCO’s Mike Max that he’s not “getting any” these days. Amen, brother. Pawlenty, like Aristophanes’s play Lysistrata, tells it like it is. In an election year, it’s good to see someone so willing to stand up to special interest. And sad, too, that such a good-looking guy is so high and dry. That guy got mad game.
As for me, I truly understand the evangelical Christian’s outrage on this court ruling. See, like any good Christian, I try as best I can to live my life in Christ’s image. And like Christ, I will not waste my time with marriage. Jesus never married, never dressed his disciples up in tuxedos and made them give drunken testaments/toasts at the American Legion of Nazareth. He never gave a sweet little Israelite a blood diamond and then forced her to choose between her falafel business or raising a family. Jesus was too busy being “married” to his one true relationship, his relationship with God. It’s truly a match made in heaven and to one we should all aspire.
You may point your finger at me and say, “What about your grandparents, David? Their marriage has ‘worked’ for more than sixty-five years.”
Sure those old coots are still stuck with each other, but it’s nothing more than a marital aberration. It’s not what nature or God ever intended. My grandparents are like those frogs in LeSueur with three legs—somehow their DNA got screwed up, most likely because of drinking water laced with pesticides.
Hopefully for California, this debate over marriage will come to a halt in the November election. Opponents of same-sex marriage have supposedly secured enough signatures to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot that would effectively define marriage in California as between a man and a woman. If voters approve the amendment, it would most likely nullify yesterday’s court decision and, thus, successfully quarantine this insidious disease we call marriage to only heterosexual couples.















Recent Comments