Jadxia

Watch this, it is important. And if you live in the District of Columbia and are an activist, come to this Saturday's march on the Capitol protesting Proposition 8.

PROP 8 PROTEST
1:30PM SATURDAY, NOV. 15
U.S. Capitol
100 Constitution Ave NE
Washington, DC 20002

Join the Impact.Wetpaint.com

Img linked from http://www.gothamgazette.com/blogs/wonkster/

Something in this post is bound to piss someone off, but I'm writing it anyway. First off, let us look at the history of marriage. Were marriages always defined as between a man and a woman for the purposes of raising a family? The institution of marriage is a unique blend of law, social customs, and religion. Initially, however, the families (or perhaps just the parties involved) had to simply declare the couple married and they were. Various religions later had various officiating bodies to declare such marriages binding by law, as law and religion were closely tied in most cultures of that era.

In the year 342, the Christian emperors Constantius and Constans declared that same-sex marriage to be illegal.¹ If someone has to declare such an act illegal, doesn't that imply that previously, such marriages were taking place (even if they were not all that common)? So the notion that we are 'preserving the sanctity of marriage' is total bunk when we continue to outlaw same-sex marriages, because a very long time ago they were legally binding, and then same-sex couples lost that right in the time of the early Christian emperors.

Read more on Same-Sex Marriages in Ancient Times

Not so long ago, and in many cultures, your social status and ethnicity were of paramount importance, but no one outside of a skinhead talks much about preserving the sanctity of one's race, either. I truly do believe in the sanctity of marriage, which is why I don't think it's appropriate to have a ridiculous wedding, such as while scuba diving or in a hot air balloon.

On the other hand, I feel it is important to follow the tenets of your chosen religion and respect the rights of the religious. Get married all you want, but don't be in a same-sex marriage and expect to stay Catholic. If you commit a cardinal sin, and continue to commit that sin, you should be excommunicated. That would also apply to other cardinal sins, such as murder or adultery. Until you truly repent, I don't feel you should be allowed back into the fold. If I should suddenly decide to become Catholic or join the FLDS (both highly unlikely prospects) then I don't want to encounter homosexuals within my religious community, because by my adopted faith such acts are spiritually criminal.

REFERENCES:
¹Wikipedia, cited from Theodosian code

This is a pretty funny little piece to show what happens when no one is reading what they post as news. It started with a pretty innocuous sort of blurb about a guy named Tyson Gay who just set the new world record for the 100 meter dash while at the US Olympic Track and Field trials. The original headline is Gay Sets U.S. Record in 100 Meter Dash at U.S. Olympic Trials.

Well, OneNewsNow doesn't use the word 'Gay' because it sounds too happy and obviously no one read the article to realize it refers to someone's name. They auto-switched 'Gay' to 'Homosexual' (in effect, changing his name to Tyson Homosexual) and put the revised AP article on their website. The whole thing sounds ludicrous when you read Homosexual eases into 100 final at Olympic trials.

Did the LGBT warrior suddenly change her stripes? Well, of course not. The whole supposition to follow is based on a series of theories, many of which are unproven with any significant, unbiased statistical truth.

First, we must assume that homosexuality is a pre-programmed behavior. Now, there IS some evidence to support this, such as studies proving that the more male pregnancies experienced by a single female, the more likely the later-born males are to profess themselves as gay. There is no corresponding information for lesbians.

There is another theory that incidences of homosexuality increase when the population reaches what the given area can sustain in terms of food production and living space. If this is true, then an increase of the gay population could very well signal a society on the verge of collapse, not through rampant sin or misbehavior, but simply because of overpopulation.

In other words, increased homosexual behavior doesn't cause the end of society as we know it, but instead signals we have reached the upper limits of the population that can be sustained by known resources.

Is the latest 'end of the world' on the horizon? It's hard to tell. Even by these theories, is homosexual behavior actually increasing or is it merely becoming more known and accepted? I actually do feel that things become more heard when they are more prevalent. Whether this is just improvement in communications which leads to the current solidarity, or whether this latest group identity has come about because it has more group members, is anyone's guess.