Katie Doyle, Girl About Town

Thursday, Jan. 20, 2005 - 8:46 p.m.

Oh, my. GDub gets re-annointed, and stupid quotes abound. I hardly know where to begin.

Oh, wait; yes, I do.

Stupid Quote(s) of the Day:

"Anybody who is against that obviously must be a communist."
--Nevada Congressman James Gibbons, on corporate-funded government functions

Gee. Guess what party Mr. Gibbons belongs to. Go ahead; guess. Certain factions of the Republican party blame everything from people who protest the invasion of Iraq to the preference for wheat bread over white on communism. That's got to be the single most ridiculous, asinine comment made today, and I have to say, I watched the video of Mr. Gibbons saying it at least 5 times, laughing my ass off the entire time. Call me a communist, then, because I frankly don't think corporate sponsorship has any place in politics, and sure as hell not as a way to pay for government functions. It's called conflict of interest. You can read about conflict of interest and why it's a bad thing here. My thanks to onegoodmove for that beauty of a quote. You can see the video and share in my glee from his page.

"Opposite-sex marriage furthers the legitimate state interest in encouraging opposite-sex couples to procreate responsibly and have and raise children within a stable environment."
-- Indiana Federal Appeals Court ruling

Coz, Jack & Mary Doyle provided such a stellar, stable environment, being the loving, nurturing opposite-sex couple they were. My eyes are rolling so hard *you* can feel it. How many unmarried women and their kids are on welfare in this country? How many battered and abused women and children are living in shelters? How many kids are of the latchkey variety or are living in single-parent homes with loser ass fathers who never pay child support? Are you kidding me, opposite-sex marriage encourages couples to procreate responsibly??? You can not be serious with that bullshit. I'm sorry, but you just can't. If your only criteria for the home environment is that the parents be of opposite sex, I will darn well take my chances with the apes, and thank you very much. Give me a loving gay parent over the hell I endured any day of the frigging WEEK.

I especially love that the court said that opposite-sex couples are distinguished from same-sex ones because they can produce children, and that because of this inability to reproduce, same-sex couples have no "core value right to marry".

First off, what, exactly, is a "core value right to marry"? The court seems to think that being able to reproduce gives one the "core value right" to marry. Which means that every single person in this country - gay or straight - who is incapable of producing viable sperm or eggs or to carry a baby to term does not have a right to marry the person he/she loves.

I'm sorry, but that is exactly what that means, like it or not. If you can not bear children, you are not allowed to marry.

Period.

According to the court, *I* have no "core value right" to marry anyone, ever, as thanks to cervical cancer and heavy scarring from endometriosis, I am incapable of giving birth. Good damn thing I'm straight, huh? Apparently, that precludes my ability to give birth. Whew. I'm mopping my brow over *that* close scrape.

I would also like to point out to the court that plenty of opposite-sex couples go the artificial insemination or surrogate route, and that if that qualifies straight women for motherhood and the ability to reproduce, it must then also apply to lesbian women, as you can not distinguish between the two for the purposes of application of law. The Constitution says so, by Supreme Court precedent, if not directly. In point of fact, the Constitution expressly says all men are created equal, which has been extrapolated to include women, and thus, it says you can not distinguish between human beings for the purposes of application of law. Hence, if straight women can be inseminated with a turkey baster, so can the non-straight ones, and legally and ethically so, whether you care for their sexual orientation or not. Therefore, all other things being equal, lesbians can reproduce just as well as their straight counterparts, thus negating your "argument" that as they can't reproduce, they have "no core value right to marry".

I guess the court does not consider love a "core value". Which gives me cause to wonder just what the hell they think is.

BTW, in case you're wondering, the state with the lowest divorce rate in the nation?

Massachusettes.

That's right. That Godless, sin-filled den of iniquity where the flaming homosexuals can get married and live out their every perverted fantasy, making every God-fearing, Marriage-protecting, Righteously Straight Person sick to his/her stomach in fear and revulsion is the state where EVERYONE, gay or straight, is most likely to actually reach their 50th wedding anniversary and live happily ever after. Texas, on the other hand, where gay people have a hard time having nice, quiet, consensual sex in the privacy of their own homes, thanks to laws on the books governing how one may or may not have sex (although, those laws don't seem to apply to straight couples, who can, presumably place parts of themselves wherever they want into their partner without fear of having their doors busted down right in the middle of it), has one of the highest divorce rates in the nation. The Bible Belt actually leads the national divorce average by 50% more than states with far more relaxed attitudes about who can do what to whom with government permission. Among consenting adults, anyway, which is what we're talking about.

But Indiana? Indiana thinks they have no "core value right to marry".

Damn. I feel safer already.

Peace out,
Katie

0 comments so far

*HUGS* TOTAL! give katiedoyle more *HUGS*
Get hugs of your own

Yesterday's News - Next Stop

In which Katie shares sad news - Wednesday, Apr. 01, 2015
In which Katie returns after a very long absence - Monday, Jun. 25, 2012
In which Katie pokes her head in and brushes some of the cobwebs away - Thursday, May. 06, 2010
In which Katie asks you to write your congressman again. - Monday, Jun. 02, 2008
In which Katie asks you to please click the link and send the message to protect the rights of artists - Wednesday, May. 21, 2008