Gay Marriage, is it normal?


Marriage March 2013
Marriage March 2013 (Photo credit: American Life League)

No..  For thousands of years marriage had been defined as between a man and a woman…  and sexual conduct between person’s of the same sex was viewed as a “perversion” with practitioners of same being considered “perverts”.

Most state laws, even those not related to marriage, are based on “common law” which is a sort of unwritten law.  These unwritten laws were adopted over the years as a way to keep order in a society.  While many of these laws would fall in line with the “10 Commandments” the reason had more to do with the keeping of order, rather than a religious proscription..  This is why many none Christian countries had laws similar to those in Christian countries, as society understood that certain acts would conflict with the common good, and order, of a properly working society.  Murder, robbery, rape, theft, and things such as libel were know to creat disorder and were therefore prohibited.  The family, being important to the structure of society, was proscribed as being between a man and a woman, with added prohibitions against such things as being married to more than one spouse, marriage to certain blood relatives, and being married to a spouse under a certain age.  As for the last two the degree of prohibition varied by area.

In the United States there are a number of law that prohibit the practice of sodomy, which would seem to invalidate homosexual marriage, as well as incest, which had resulted in that prohibition.

The United States Supreme Court seems to be about to decide if the marriage of homosexuals in a constitutional right, or not.  Not being a constitutional scholar I don’t see the connection but, I can see the possibility of them striking down the bans against the marriage of homosexuals, which leads me to wonder how long it will be before they also strike down the other prohibitions.

A lot of the conversation has to do with what people think about homosexuals,  Are they really a perversion that society must be protected against?  I don’t know though I would have to go with the idea that they are not the norm, and to allow them to marry would help to diminish the concept, and purpose, of marriage.

I am reminded of an old episode of the TV show  “West Wing” where several White House staffer were holding a discussion with several mid range military offices on what the President stance on this subject of “Gays” in the military would be. At one point one of the staffers, makes that statement that “the President, as Commander n Chief of the Armed Forces can say that they can stay, and that is “it””.  The Military staffer points out that the Uniform Code of Military Justice still prohibits sodomy and that since that is a law passed by congress it doesn’t really matter what the President says, it is still illegal conduct.  The UCMJ also prohibits adultery.

Could the Supreme Court decide in favor of homosexual/Gay marriage?  Yes, it is possible.  What the constitution says is often a reflection of the Justices views and might have little to do with what the Constitution says.  Look at Justice  Sotomayor who made the statement during her confirmation hearings, which she later took back, that she would bring her “hispanic viewpoint” to the Supreme Court.  This is a sure indicator that she considers her viewpoint to be more important than what the Constitution actually says…  and she has voted with the Liberal block ever since…  All the Justices do is make the Constitution say what they want it to.  So the question is : are there enough Justices on the Supreme Court who understand that society, and the institution of marriage, must have a stable framework, or are there enough Justices who feel that marriage is just another legally recognized relationship that can be molded to fit their view?

We will just have to find out.

Thanks,

That Joe Guy.

Multi-tiered Ethical Standards


Also know as Double standards…

When we venture out into the world, there are certain standards of conduct that we expect from people, there are certain standards that we expect them to live by, and we judge them by our idea of ethics.  For Military people it is the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the Federal Law that lays out the acceptable conduct of military personnel.  This tells them what is expected of them, and what can happen to them of they violate these standards.

Most of use are bound by City, County, State and Federal Law, and the violation of these laws might result in fines and/or imprisonment.

Christians have the 10 Commandments, which tell them how they are supposed to act, though there are other sections of the bible that lay out other requirements, it is still the 10 Commandments that get the most attention.

Evan social organisations have standards of conduct, the violation of which might result in expulsion.

One of my favorite quotes by a fictional character is by Gen. Freeman, in a book written by Ian Slater.  The General is talking about prostitutes and makes the statement “prostitutes, their little better than politicians”.  I have always thought that statement said a lot… So what does this have to do with the conversation?

The question is : why do we set such low standards for politicians?  If my friends lied to me as much as the average politician I would stay away from him but, in the case of the people we put into some government office, to represent us, we set the ethical bar so low that the only way they seem to run afoul of it is to land in jail.

Teddy Kennedy‘s drunk driving killed a young woman on his staff.  If I had gotten drunk, run off the road into the water, and had left the young woman to drown I would have probably been in jail for murder.  Teddy just kept getting reelected, which just goes to show the type of standards the voters in his state had.  Newt Gingrich tried to appeal to the conservative Christians in Florida, in spite of his having not only cheated on 2 out of 3 wives but had broken his oath to Jehovah twice, that we know of.  Fortunately the Christian population did NOT fall for it.  When Marco Rubio was running for office he told the people, who would vote for him, that his parents fled the tyranny of Fidel Castro, in spite of the fact that they had left Cuba several years BEFORE Castro got into power, they still voted for him.

If you are really interested in the standards of your favorite politician then write down his statements about his opponent, and then check them with one of the fact check websites, and see how much truth you can get out of them…..  MOSTLY TRUE is NOT the TRUTH…  and as Fox Mulder used to say “the truth is out there”.

Lets start to hold Politicians to the same standards we would anybody else, which doesn’t include lawyers, banker, used car salesmen, military recruiters..  oh, I think you get the idea.