RE: Open letter to my two corporate-whore Senators
December 3, 2012 at 1:10 pm
(This post was last modified: December 3, 2012 at 1:10 pm by Creed of Heresy.)
(December 3, 2012 at 10:13 am)A Theist Wrote: ...how far should our government go with cultural distortions to redefine marriage in this country...since homosexual marriage between consenting adults is recognized in some states, why not take it farther to also include polygamous marriages between consenting adults where a man or a woman can legally marry multiple spouses?
Why not, indeed?
(December 3, 2012 at 10:40 am)A Theist Wrote: why stop there....would you also agree to redefining marriage to include legally recognizing incestual marriages between consenting adults, brother / sister, uncle / niece, aunt / nephew, parent / child.....
Again, why would I not? Who are YOU to say what someone can or cannot do if it does not harm another, if all parties are willing and consenting?
(December 3, 2012 at 11:23 am)A Theist Wrote: I also believe our government has the responsibility to preserve the stability of our culture...which includes defending traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
W...what?? WHAT?? WHAT?! WHAT?!!
Stability of our cultu-
WHICH ONE?! The Chinese one? The Irish one? The Scottish one? British, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Russian, Indigenous [all hundred or so of them], French, African, Japanese, Mongolian- WHICH ONE of the EVERY SINGLE CULTURE IN EXISTENCE we are comprised of are you referring to, dude?
America's supposed to be about freedom. That's the ONLY culture that means a damn thing. Unless of course you're talking about the culture of the puritans and if so, well, why don't we just also preserve the stability of witch-trials, huh? How about some good ol'-fashioned cultural raping of local, native peoples...in every sense of the word? How about we preserve the cultural stability of White Man > Everyone Not A White Man?? In other words, why don't we just go ahead and preserve ass-backwardsness? Why don't we go ahead and preserve regression and stagnation? In trade for the liberty and freedom the Founding Fathers fought for, died for, and suffered for? Whatever the hell we were BEFORE the Constitution was implemented, it was supposed to die at that moment, but because change is slow it took us around 200 years to start actually getting to the point where "all men are created equal" started being something we stopped preaching about and started genuinely practicing.
There is no justification for wanting to live in the past other than insecurity. You can't say it's what the founding fathers would have wanted because the Constitution clearly paved the way for what we have today; a society that is slowly but surely becoming all-accepting of those who wish to live their lives so long as they harm nobody else or force anybody else into anything and that is slowly but surely beginning to get sick of being told how they should live their lives for the "good of tradition."
This country is advancing. It was doing it faster before because shit changed; society changed, we changed. And it only took eight years of republicans pumping the brakes full-stop to completely derail the train of economic progress, but they couldn't stop the train of social progress, and that scares them, and that's why despite losing 2012 HORRIBLY they're gonna keep doing what they've been doing because, as the Paladin said, they've shackled their wagon to a dying star. Being old and crotchety and bitching about all the newfangled stuff is getting old...and it's dying. A new breed of Americans, who are far more accepting and flexible than their elders were, are taking over. And if the republicans don't clusterfuck it before they can get their hands on the reins, this country will be BEAUTIFUL. It will be GLORIOUS. It will be what America was MEANT to be; the land of the TRULY free and home of the bravely open-minded.
U-S-A!! U-S-A!! U-S-A!! [just imagine those last letters were white or somethin']