Iwan, I don't know why you and the rest of the Cap'n MPD crew chooses my site to go on and on about this stuff, but regarding that link, I just want to say: correlation is not causation, and I don't think enough of the religous "right" understands that.
kirk,
i think the answer to your question is the same as Clinton's explanation, "because I (they) can"...
pam
If a decline in marriage is really the root of all our problems, shouldn't we be encouraging *all* marriages -- including same-sex ones? According to this logic, the more marriage the better -- so get out there and oppose George's proposed constitutional amendment to limit it!!
This is, of course, faulty logic. As Kirk says: a correlation is not a cause. The decline in marriage is NOT the cause of the world's woes, much though simplistic people might like us to believe it. The real flaw lies within ourselves -- a general refusal to accept responsibility in *all* areas. We don't commit to a company, we change jobs at a moment's notice for more money. We don't commit to a neighborhood, we're always looking to "move up." We don't commit to a religion, we pick and choose bits of this one or that one as we like. We don't commit to a consistent foreign policy, we do what's expedient at the moment and then try to rewrite history later and pretend we didn't do what we did. We don't commit to raising strong, intelligent children, we want the government (or the schools) to do it for us. We don't commit to saving money and being self-supporting, we buy lottery tickets and get credit cards. We don't commit to environmental responsibility, we buy SUVs because they're cool and let everyone else sign the Kyoto treaty. We don't commit to change and then ACT, we sit around on our asses and whine that the world isn't what we'd like it to be.
The root cause of our problems is that we are refusing to commit to being what we are: thinking, rational beings. We want an unspecified "someone else" to do the thinking for us while we just float along blissfully ignoring reality: eating Big Macs and being surprised (or litigious) when we have heart attacks, buying Hummers and being surprised when soldiers have to die to protect our oil imports. We can't commit to anything, not even *reality* -- is it any wonder so few people are willing to commit to a partner?
I absolutely love this site. This is my #1 place on the net. I usually just visit this one. Hands down the greatest site. I love poetry. Everyone does a great job. I just wanted to say thanks you are all inspiring.
What the right-wingers don't want to emphasize is that the "logical" extension of their "marriage is so important because of the children" thinking puts any marriage that can't or chooses not to have children into a *deeply* suspicious light. So basically, they won't admit to their 1800s "marriage is for makin' babies" view, or the anti-gay sentiment that's behind most of this so they hide behind the "the traditional family is the bedrock of our society" rhetoric. otherwise you'd expect them to be opening the option of a more stable and difficult-to-get-out-of relationship to gays as well, as you say.
Marriage was created as a contractual arrangement - to bind property and rights of inheritance in a tradition of patriarchy (if you give me the biblical argument, I will show you men with many wives, or even the example of David and Bathsheba - and the New Testament is silent on the whole issue of concubines, although it does praise the sanctitiy of marriage). The current argument is being cloaked by some on both sides of the issue at hand (that is the gender of the parties to this arrangement) in terms that obfuscate this fact, but that fact does remain. And the born-again cynic in me sees that the ones leading the way on this issue are by and large whipping the masses into a frenzy for crass political gain (certainly this is true more for one side of the argument than the other, but there is plenty of blame to go around).
(in other words, your logic is irrefutable, Kirk)
(kevin)
For Fathers Day my Dad (That I Love Dearly) asked for my presence at church. Well Dad never asks for anything so as reluctant as I was and fearful that the roof would fall on my head, I took in another churchly experience. He was a visiting young minister. I thought well, a young view on this (Yeah Right) Well BE-EL-ZEE-BUB is alive and well, (whew, I figured they had got him by now, but if they can't get Osama well that figures huh) and they named off every old fashioned sin in the book (including the ones you are talking about Kirk and Kev) and then some. I felt like I was fourteen again and ready to go on a rampage..ha I only hope Dad's birthday does not come on Sunday this year. I was glad to see that the Southern Baptist Council of Churches got mad at the requests from the Republican Party for their church directories names and addresses. I hope Momma Cheney gets fuming and bashes them some on behalf of her and Dickys gay daughter. Keeping church and state seperate is becoming trickier with this bunch that tries to play every BE-EL-ZEE-BUB TRICK IN THE BOOK. HA
bk
Darn, I was going to save this for a full moon but it's the new issue of Grist and needs to be seen.
Sush; "It Had To Be You!" ha
bk
I got laughing so hard I forgot to put the link in haha
http://www.gristmagazine.com/ha/ha071204.asp?source=weekly
bk
bk ~ that is really cute...you can post it again on full moon...
chung ~ i just read all your submissions...very impressive...so eloquently said in all you write...you have won me...keep enticing me...