Post #300 05/08/12: A Day Of Infamy

"All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression."
-- Thomas Jefferson

A quote from ol' TJ is a good place to start any political discussion....

On May 8, 2012, North Carolina will be exposed as having as many bigots as Alabama, Mississippi or -- gasp! -- South Carolina for, on that day, North Carolinians will vote to oppress a minority by an amendment to the North Carolina Constitution that says that marriage rights, privileges and responsibilities shall be confined to couples consisting of one man and one woman, and that the state shall not recognize any other domestic partnership among consenting adults.

So, North Carolina will join the rest of the Southeast in having an 'anti-gay marriage' amendment in their state Constitution. Now, I've always known that North Carolina was full of bigots, but I enjoyed having a 'good no-nonsense' reputation. But that will change on May 8.

Yep, the Republican-controlled Legislature of North Carolina, with unemployment creeping above 10% in North Carolina, decided to call a special session -- at a cost of $150,000 -- to put this important issue on the primary ballot when Republicans can vote for Rick Perry in the Presidential primary. And how does this make 'em good stewards of our money!?!

All in the name of protecting marriage. It seems to me that the best way to protect marriage would be to outlaw divorce -- tho Newt Gingrich who is on wife #3 might object!

This means that unmarried couples - gay or straight - will be constitutionally barred from numerous benefits automatically given to married couples. No right to visit a loved one in the hospital, no right to make medical decisions on behalf of their incapacitated partners, no inheritance rights shall be extended to a boyfriend or girlfriend. Indeed, a boyfriend or girlfriend cannot make funeral and burial decisions or have access to Social Security and government medical care. Indeed, the General Accounting Office listed over 1000 federal benefits to married couples.

That is why I oppose all marriages -- straight, gay, or the marriage to your dog or your daughters: The government has no interest in promoting unions of any kind -- thro tax breaks or any incentives.

It can be argued that, during the 19th century, the government had an interest in promoting unions and therefore children. The country needed to be populated, and government codifying the value of religious marriage was the way to go. But that changed sometime during the 20th century.

However, the government does have an interest in promoting the establishments of homes to raise children as this would be cheaper than government-financed orphanages. Therefore, gay couples who want to raise children should get government benefits for doing so.

Please note that my argument as of today has nothing to do with religion -- neither for nor against a religious definition of marriage. This amendment is an intrusion by the government into the church's domain. I believe in the separation of church and state....