That is a fault of state, not of God. To enhance that wrong by perpetuating a human perversion that one may support does not make it right. And one can interpret *right* any way they choose.

–George

gekko wrote:
> Marriage *today* is about forming a
> family unit for a broad perspective of
> civil and legal issues. It is, by its
> own nature, a moral thing.

I reply:
Now, see, that’s where we go off track. Marriage today, like marriage centuries ago, is a contract that governs transfer of property from one generation to the next.

Once upon a time, the transfer was guaranteed by the guy with the big stick which, while interesting from an anthropological (and even evolutionary) standpoint, has nothing to do with procreation in this sense.

Now that we have governing bodies in the form of states, the transfer is guaranteed by the guy with the judicial robes and the state gets its cut. Usually in cash rather than flesh.

Understand this. The state sanctions marriage. A church, any church, sanctifies it. It is perfectly legal to have a civil marriage without the presence of God. OTOH, the opposite is not true.

But my point had nothing to do with marriage and everything to do with keeping our elected representatives busy so they could not screw up anything else.

http://lizarddreams.scribblinlizard.com/archives/2009/04/iowa-stubborn.html

Damn, I’m good.

As for guns, unauthorized guns are already in the schools, churches and parks, etc. We read about it every day, and any sensible citizens opposes them being there. But, do they contribute to the AZ deficit, too?

Lordy, I need to go back to money school and learn how things really work .

Dangerous Bill

Moderates and liberals see marriage as merely a civil matter, nothing else. They do not sign on to the moral aspects of it. And you cannot change a sow’s purse into a silk ear, or however the old platitude goes.

Homosexual people have the same rights as normal people to whatever the law gives them. It is the American way. Besides, I love to see those guys try to catch the bouquet.

And the way they squeal is a hoot. You can hear them all the way to North Puffin.

–George Poleczech

Marriage, and particulary the laws relating to marriage, is largely about children, and making the environment (social and ecconomic both) friendly for raising kids. Tax breaks, worker benefits have all historically offered advantages to those who are married. Why? Because raising kids is (a) necessary to prevent extinction, (b)a key ingredient to a growing economy, and (c) EXPENSIVE for the parents. Marriage without childrem is largely just recreational, but in heterosexual unions, it is the exception.

These benefits are needed by people married in conventional heterosexual child-producing relationships a HELL of a lot more than in gay relationships. If you arbitrarily legislate equality of gay union and conventional marriage, gays will get a lot of benefits they don’t usually need, generally, and WHICH AREN’T IN ANYONE’S BUDGET! Remember, this can have implications on taxes, job benefits, Social Security and who knows what else. Are you SURE you want to push more money to the liberal side during the worst recession since the 30’s???

This is NOT a good idea, on a pragmatic basis. And I dont need to get into the moral issues….

This blog was an “aw shit.” And you know what that does to “attaboys.”

Bob

I predict I will collect more commentary because I favor same sex marriage than because I champion the mushroom school of management.

For the record, I think U.S. citizens should be left to their own devices except when they run for Congress.