You Can't Always Get What You Want. . .

I'm going to make a prediction. I listened to the justices today and I picked up on something. They don't want to be dragged into a debate on such an issue. I think they are really wondering why they are involved at all, which is exactly my stance. I see a ruling that is going to pitch this ball right back to the states and the court is going to tell them to just deal with it. We will see.

Debate in the Supreme Court

Best bits from today

Equal Sign on FaceBook

Day Two The DOMA

Rush says Gay marriage s inevitable

Justices Begin to Doubt Validity of DOMA

Tiptoe through the DOMA with me

Will Legal Make It Legal?

One More For The Bandwagon

One more out of the closet

James Yaegar agrees with ME

Court Hears Arguments Today

Supreme Court Hears Argument

Religious-Civil Pro & Con

Picked up this clip from CNN. When I first began this blog I felt as if I may be in the minority, but this discussion shows that the general population, including Hillary Clinton, thinks that we have more pressing issues and need to resolve this, put it behind us and move on with our nation's recovery. The statement on CNN went as so:


It was inevitable that the debate over same-sex marriage would have a strong religious component. This is partly because it involves such questions as the interpretation of biblical passages that, on their face, condemn homosexuality as a sin. But it also involves squaring the authority of ancient texts with modern theological understanding and developments in biology. And of course, the importance of love and human autonomy as religious values should be considered. 

Religious-Civil Discussion

Being Gay in Mississippi

Statistically speaking, Franklin County should be straighter than John Wayne eating Chick-fil-A. The middle-of-nowhere rectangle in southwest Mississippi -- known for its pine forests, hog hunting and an infamous hate crime -- is home to exactly zero same-sex couples, according to an analysis of census data.

The County With No Gays

Support For Gay Marriage rises to 58%

Support Rises

Public Leads in Gay Marriage Debate

Public opinion

Since When Did We Legislate Morality?

                                                         Common Sense

     When I began this blog it was at the request at a friend. Although I am not gay, he is, and we've had many discussions about the plight of gay people. Actually, I had never addressed this issue. The more I talked with him the more I began to form opinions on the subject. Now, I, myself, have no issue with gay people. I'm from Austin. The gay community in Austin fits in with the society. We don't take issue with that.  I've made jokes about gay waiters, and barbers, but in point of fact it is no joke. If you live in Austin you learn very quickly that a gay waiter will earn his tip. You understand that a gay hair stylist will shape your hair with great skill. So why shouldn't these people be accorded the protection of law that we all enjoy? Why should the supreme court have to review a case at all, to affirm that all people are afforded the right of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, whatever that may be? 

     A gay couple in you're neighborhood will not depreciate your property values. They will stay private, simply because of the chastisement the gay community has endured for years. Rejection of family, and society has programmed them for this. They understand this, but what does this have to do with two people pledging their commitment to each other, and receiving the benefit of law when they are invariably left alone after the loss of their life partner?  

     And, we circle back again to the question of why. If you are uncomfortable with gay people don't go around them. I hear men say all the time about how they think gay sex is disgusting, well heterosexual sex is disgusting to me unless I'm doing the sexing! With a deficit of Biblical proportions, a war we cannot resolve, a debate on gun control, and our credit rating reduced to the level of a crack dealer, the most August court in the land is meeting this week to see who's fucking who!  Have we lost our minds? Since when did the government decide what does on behind closed doors between adults, and since when did the government reserve the right to license sanctity? 

     When California started this proposition 8 nonsense they stepped on their respective dicks. With legal dope, gun laws out the ass, and earthquakes and they have an issue with this?  OMFG!  Gay rights is a non issue. Since when does a person's sexuality have anything to do with their rights as an American?  Let the gays have their rights. What will it hurt?  The majority of people are heterosexual. The gays aren't going to out vote you. The Mexicans have a handle on that. We seriously need to move on to more worthy matters. Like how to print money that's worth something!

It Won't End ay the Supreme Court

Gay bumps after the ruling

Gay Marriagengood for Chikdren?

Pediatric View of Gay Marriage

Gay Divorce in Texas?

Texas Divorce Laws

Two Insights On Gay Marriage & The Supreme Court

Possible Outcomes


The Constitution and Marriage

Pope Francis has Supported Civil Unions

Pope Has Supported Civil Unions

Same sex couple married by tribe

Tee Pee Love

Bill Gates on Gay ban in Boy Scouts

Bill Gates urges end of Boy Scouts Gay ban

GOP Portman supports Gay marriage

Portman on Gay marriage

To All The Girls I've Loved Before

                                                    The Art of Marriage

     I've mentioned that I've been married numerous times. There was Charsa, Brenda, Barbara, and Pam. Mary Ellen is in there somewhere but I leave her out of the official tally because we only lasted six days and I think I forgot to divorce her. She's not complaining and neither am I. 

     My mother told me if I ever disrespected a decent girl she would kill me. Consequently, the only come on line I had was, "Will you marry me?" I apparently was good at it because I never got turned down. That, and getting married in Texas is easy. You can do it during lunch, and they give you a little gift pack to take home. Mainly soaps and deodorant. 

     My first wife was Charsa. She was a waitress who worked with my mother. I dated her for about two months and she was skinny with bad teeth. I was nineteen or so, and she was divorced. When I told my mother I was going to marry her she beat me in the head with an iron skillet. I married her anyway. We had a good relationship right up until she left me. I was devastated. Actually, she ran off with her boyfriend. 

     Then came Brenda. She was a friend of my sister, and a really cute blonde. She was younger than me and her dad freaked out when she ran away to be with me. He eventually paid fora wedding in his house. We had two boys, and held together for seven brutal years. She took it all personal when I flew off to New York to see Mary Ellen. 

     Mary was a dandy. She was New York. She lived on Long Island, wore stockings, her father was rich, and she loved to go to bed. Of course, my marriage to Brenda crashed and burned when I went to New York. She cleaned me out and went to her parent's house in Illinois? I convinced Mary to come to Texas. Of course I lied to her. I moved her into an apartment, whereupon she freaked out and went right back to New York. She did continue to visit me from time to time.

     Then there was Barbara. I married her to get custody if my two boys. She was ten years older than I was, had this God-awful tattoo on her privates, and we slept in separate rooms. It was along about this time that I began to write comedy. I put up with her for two years. I met Pam, went home, and ran her off. 

     Then came my twenty-five year marriage to Pam. Pam is the love of my life. We divorced over the mess with my grandchildren, and she remarried, but she stands by me. I'm convinced I could not live in a world without Pam. 

     We pass through this life with a lot of people. My life has been, well, interesting. I wouldn't have missed any of these girls. Thank you each and everyone. 

Westboro Baptist Church

I'm going to do a blog on this, but I have to get over being mad first.

And now, the Westboro Baptist Church. . . Let us pray

http://youtu.be/DgrRn2XbKFM

Boy Scouts,Girl Scouts, and Them Scouts

Scouts Survey Members on Gay Ban

http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/boy-scouts-survey-volunteers-workers-gay-ban-18714038:

Let's not forget the polygamists

     When you address Gay Rights, and all the legal implications of same sex marriage you cannot ignore the incursion of government into another facet of privacy which is polygamy. You must ask yourself, if consenting adults agree to this situation what does the government have to say about it, and even make it a crime?  I read an article by the American Bar Association which addresses the idea that plural marriage is inherently unfair to women, and in a way I think there may be a basis here. Why, I wonder, aren't there marriages involving one woman and four husbands?  Well, that's because a man with four wives is a stud, and a woman with four husbands is a slut. Or so the perception seems to be. 

     As Alice Cooper sang, "Only Women Bleed." polygamy was last practiced publicly by the Mormons. Yes, you did it, sit down!  Of course, with the carrot of statehood dangling tantalizingly before their bright, scrubbed faces, God told them that it wasn't cool, and the extra sisters were removed and we got Utah!  But it didn't end. LDS splintered into FLDS and other groups and the practice remains till this day. 

     But, other than the fact that someone is supporting multiple wives what involves the government?  And when you answer that question you circle right back to Gay marriage. If the Supreme court tells us Gay marriage is cool, then how can they, in good conscience, say plural marriage is uncool?  See how that works?  If something that a lot of people consider to be an unnatural union is legalized, indeed blessed by the government, then how can they stand against a practice that is prevalent in that very same Bible they are waving at the homosexual community?  How many wives did David have, and oh God, let's not count girlfriends, I mean concubines. 

     If people choose to live in a plural situation so be it. Other than pissing off a few Baptist preachers what does it hurt. What's the government afraid of, that maybe they'll have to rewrite the tax code and lose a buck or two? The Gay community is just fighting to become legitimate under the law and have the ability to marry. Polygamists fight for their very freedom even if they say nothing and just live on a farm somewhere and grow potatoes. 

  As we eagerly await the omnipotent wisdom of the court, let us all consider these things. Why is the government so interested in our sex lives?  Why don't they concentrate on things that count. Like only spending only money they have, feeding OUR poor, and completing wars against third world countries with no standing army?  They can't because they are trying to legislate morality. You can't do that. Google it. 

     No matter what you may think these questions are not going away. People are people. I think they just haven't found a way to make money off of it yet. As soon as they do marriage licenses will come on perforated rolls. 

http://www.americanbar.org/publications/human_rights_magazine_home/human_rights_vol38_2011/human_rights_spring2011/should_polygamy_be_permitted_in_the_united_states.html

And what about polygamy ?

I'm going to address this in a future blog that I will put right here, but that is what drew me to this article. Isn't it time the government got OUT of the bedrooms of consenting adults?

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/03/12/what-ought-to-be-asking-gay-marriage-advocates/

100's rally in Austin

Mentioned the Austin scene in my article. Did I lie?



http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2013/03/hundreds-lobby-for-gay-rights-marriage-equality-at-texas-state-capitol/

Video on Gay Marriage

http://youtu.be/3X0tA2uumQU

There Is Nothing Gay About Marriage

                                  There Is Nothing Gay About Marriage

     Watched a video this morning over coffee. Kid needs to learn that where the video on the iPhone is set when he pushes the record button is where it will stay orientated when you flip said phone and begin to talk. Also there is an edit feature on YouTube where you can correct that, but I'm digressing. 

     The subject of the video was gay marriage. Now, I want to state at the onset that I've been married five times and there's nothing gay about it. It's a gamble where you bet half your possessions that you will love someone forever with no deviance. Friends, I have never made this proposition succeed. That's why I DATE three women now if various colors and ages. Ever notice how there's always a lot of different chocolates in a box of candy?  Life is like a box of candy . . .I'm digressing again.  

     I'm well schooled on gay lifestyle and politics. Being from Austin, I have many gay friends. Their advice and input has helped me over the years. In Austin you quickly learn the best waiters and hair stylists are invariably gay. Now I'm not saying gays don't make good doctors, but I eat and get my hair cut more often than I get my heart cut out so I encounter gay waiters and hair stylists more often than I do gay doctors, though I might consider a gay proctologist over some guy who starred on the football team in college, but that's another story. 

     Anyway, where were we?  Oh yes, gay marriage. The guy in this video launches into the separation of church and state. And, he explains that although the constitution never uses that phrase per sae, it implies it by securing religious freedom, i. e. the government has no right to restrict or govern our choice of god (s),  He makes a point about marriage being a religious situation, and "legalizing" gay marriage would only open a Pandora's box of licensing, divorce legal fees, and lawsuits against clergy who refuse to cooperate. Then he launches into the Bible, and I stopped listening at that point because I've read the book. 

     I would like to say that the line between church and state began to blur when the first marriage license was issued. That's right. Think about that. If you got married in the church, why did that priest, pastor, or Rabbi have to fill out and sign that state form to register your union with the government?  And, if it's solely a religious right, why don't we just go to the church if we ever decide to untie the knot?  Catholics, sit down!  

     The moment that first marriage license was issued marriage ceased to be as much spiritual as fiscal. See, that's the government's interest. Follow the money, folks. Between licensing fees, divorce costs, and income taxes, gay marriage will be a windfall for those inside the beltway. Now, if it flies, the money will last about two minutes before the Democrats find a pigeonhole to throw it down, but that's another article. My point is simply this; the government, at all levels, is already in the marriage business. That's a done deal. And your religious revulsion to gay lifestyle is a mute argument. What if you have a gay church performing gay marriages?  Never considered that one, huh?

     Myself, I choose not to get involved with anyone's sexuality except Miss Right Now. I don't like to watch, or think about anyone having sex except me. I take that back. I don't mind seeing two University of Texas Coeds kissing, but I'm not perfect, ok? I would venture to say that if gay marriage is upheld by the Supreme Court it would just extend the government's involvement in private and religious affairs that much more and if it doesn't, and the justices say they cannot be involved, then we need to ask why the hell are they still selling marriage licenses?  This question is a lot like sex when you look at it. You're either in or you're out. 

     Gay people want the protection of law for their civil or religious unions. No more, no less. They want to be able to buy a house, have a deduction on their taxes, and be able to probate in the end. They are not going away no matter how hard you thump that Bible. When the ruling comes down there will be a great debate, there always is, with everyone not realizing that closing the gate when the horse is already gone is useless. 

http://youtu.be/us2-OR595ZM