Prop 8...

I'm confused. Is there a "separation of church and state," or not really, as long as enough of the church votes?

What is marriage, really? Well, some conservative christians would say that God created marriage, between a male and a female (of course), so that they could then have "legitimate" sex.. you know, that feeling where two "married" people are the closest they can get, as some symbol for how God feels about his relationship with us. Hmmm... minorly creepy to me. To others it might simply be a cultural or religious tradition to "prove" your commitment to another person, symbolized with a ring, a ceremony and anniversaries. Still to others, maybe just a fiduciary contract to protect assets. So again I ask, "What is marriage?"

"Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California." - Prop 8.

If marriage is truly a spiritual contract between two breeding hetero's and their god, then why is the state involved at all? For that matter, why aren't these people fighting for the state to back the fuck off? Let's get Prop 8a on the ballot. No state involvement in a contract with God! (Oh, I forgot about the tax advantages.. but that's another post.)

If marriage is truly a "christian" institution, created by God, then why aren't churches fighting for "christian only" legislation? Why can two Atheists marry? Or two Satanists? Or is that okay, because it's still penis to vagina contact? And we all know that a penis "traditionally" enters the vagina. Right? (bad joke pending: Dick is to vagina as Rick Warren is to pop-culture... pop-culture being the vagina... purpose driven life, my ass)

If marriage is a cultural tradition, then let all "cultures" partake. Hopefully we'll forget about the times when marriage was "traditionally" not allowed between whites and blacks, or mulattoes or Mongolians. Seriously... Mongolians. These were forbidden until the 1930's in California!

If marriage is simply a fiduciary contract, ordained by a judge, stamped and sealed by the state, then... wait a minute. Wait one fucking minute! You mean to tell me that I can take the bus to the county courthouse, fill out some paperwork, say "I do" in front of a judge and the state declares me married? Shit! I've been duped. So have all my "traditional valued" church going friends. I thought marriage was all about God! God must be pissed right now. I mean, He created this perfect union between Adam and Eve, then thousands of years later, not only are monks taking a life of celibacy (heretics), but somewhere along the way Jews and christians stopped requiring people to have faith in God to get married? Now look... non-christian ceremonies. Mixed race couples. People allowed to marry after they've been divorced. Jesus would've rolled over in His tomb... (oh, that one was funny, and no lightning). Or does Jesus really care? I don't think He would let legislation get in the way of loving people in any walk of life. I don't think he would've cared about the legislation in general. But for some reason, the church feels the need to legislate it's morality, just like the Church of England did when white people fled persecution to find a land that would give them freedom. Is this the same moral legislation that led to the Crusades and burning witches at the stake? I hope not.

Domestic partnership laws in California afford the "partner" in a "registered" relationship essentially the same rights as a "married" spouse. So why aren't t-vals (traditional valuists) up in arms over this? Is it really about the legal definition of the word "marriage" as legislated by the state? If so, I hope the Attorney General and the Courts figure it out for us, and grant people their civil rights, just like religious institutions and hate groups are granted their civil rights. Yes, I said them in the same breath. I don't believe they are the same, but sometimes I fear they come awfully close. This issue should not be about the "acceptance" of homosexuality from any religious institution. Churches should be able to preach what they want, as they've always been able to do and should not feel threatened when the state decides to offer the same protection to another group.

I want to believe in a better place... a better state, a better community, a better church, but I think that we have stop legislating our individual moral fortitude on other people.

Side note: Maybe all of this has something to do with men. Straight men. Straight men that are homophobes. Straight men that are disgusted by two men walking hand-in-hand down the street, but whack off to two naked ladies licking each other. See the Henry Adams Study: where 80% of self-described "homophobic" heterosexual men in the study, when wearing a penile gauge, were turned on by homosexual porn, as compared with only 34% of "non-homophobic" heterosexual men. Interesting, to say the least.