Tuesday, February 14, 2006

SOAP BOX Revisited

I wrote this to another blog
a year or so ago.

And it still bothers me that
Boise is passing a law against
marriages for gays. We all
know that most of Idaho is run
by the Boise set, and that there
is a heavy religious set down there,
that rules us. But I was hoping
that the politicians would stand
up for a union ceremony at least
for the gays.
So here was my opinion last year...
and it still stands.

There are 3 types of marriages.
A. The one in a religious house
(depending on which religion it is)
and headed by the head religious
person.(Priest,Rabbi and etc.)

B. The one where a minister
marries people in their yards,
parks, mountains, underwater, or
while sky diving.

C. one called the Civil Union
done by a Justice of Peace, Judge,
or even a mayor.

A and B involve God.
C. is done by the words of: By the
power given me by the State of (fill in)
you are now married.

Each of these has had their fair
share of divorces. A. probably has
the least, but not by a lot. All have
been gone into, what we hope, are good
intentional people. Good decent
people. People who just want to live
with someone they love and hope to
protect legally. Those who go by God,
either understand the gay life,or chose
not to understand. And some have
the Service idea of "don't tell me and I
won't ask you" way.

The truth of the matter is, gay life
coming out of the closet and choosing
to try to put it back in, is like
trying to put tooth paste back into
the tube. Can't be done and most
really don't want try to do that. So
what about gay's, aren't they entitle
to have some kind of a legal protection
for their love ones?

C. Civil Union seems to be the answer
as they aren't involving God. I really
don't know what the answer is. But I
do feel that there should not be a law,
especially an Amendment to the
Constitution forbidding ones rights
over another, as long as there
is no harm. Gays have been together,
for over 100 years or even more.
Just now they are asking for a
commitment that is legal to protect
them legally in hospitals, (to see their
love ones, as most only let in relatives)
and financially. They too just want
to commit to some one they love.
When do they get to be treated the
same as the rest of the Americans in
this country?

2 comments:

Dogwalkmusings said...

Why is okay for our "celebrities" to have babies out of wedlock yet two people who genuinely love each other and are willing to make a commitment be denied same?

I'm with you Cis.

Word Tosser said...

Exactly, what I said on DFO's blog.