Mr. Obama, What Is Your Definition Of Marriage?

Now that the Pres has come out and endorsed gay marriage, I have to ask him (and other liberals) - where does it end?  What is your definition of marriage?

Marriage has been defined as the union between a man and a woman - period.  There have been homosexual relationships throughout time, but they have never been recognized as marriage.  The basis of this is both civil and religious.

So, Mr. Obama, according to you and your friends, what is the defnintion of marriage you wish us to use?  Is it the recognized union of two people?  If so, why?

If the legal definition of marraige can be expanded from a man and a woman to a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, why must it be limited to that?

If you do not allow for other unions to be recognized, then you are discriminating, aren't you?

How about polygamists?  Having more than one wife or husband is illegal, and frowned upon by almost everyone in society.  Why?  If a man and a man can be wed, why not a man, a woman, and another woman?  Or three men?  Or six women and a man? 

How about the man who is in love with his Japanese robot girlfriend and wants to marry 'her'?

How about the woman who is in love with her German Shepherd?

How about the man who wants to marry his sweetheart, who died 4 years ago?

How about the Jack-in-the-Box commercial guy who wants to marry some bacon?

How about the car nut who wants to marry his hotrod?

All of these sound silly, yes.  But, to a vast majority of Americans, the idea of two women marrying sounds just as silly.

You may say I'm being silly and sarcastic.  I am not.  If you change the rule to meet the wishes of one group of minorities, then how can you say you won't change that same rule to meet the wishes of other minorities? 

You watch - if somehow same sex marriage becomes the law of the land, someone else (polygamists probably) are going to be the next group to jump up and claim discrimination, demanding the right to exercise their wishes and have it recognized by the government.  The government and society will have no legal or moral grounds to oppose them, given that the time tested definition of marriage has been thrown out the window.

Miss California Attacked by Gays

Miss California, Carrie Prejean, came in second in last night's Miss USA pageant. Carrie, is seen on the right, with winner Kristen Dalton (Miss North Carolina).

Normally, I wouldn't give any notice to this. Beauty pageants just don't hold much interest for me. However, the headlines surrounding the pageant this morning, and in particular comments made by Carrie and the reaction to them, really pissed me off.

During the Q&A session, flaming gay gossip blogger Perez Hilton asked Carrie whether she believed in gay marriage or not. Her reply:

"We live in a land where you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite. And you know what, I think in my country, in my family, I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anybody out there, but that's how I was raised."

Now that's a good answer. She stated her beliefs, born from her religion and upbringing, without forcing them on anyone. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, right?

Apparently not in California.

"As co-director of the Miss California USA, I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss California believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman. I believe all religions should be able to ordain what unions they see fit. I do not believe our government should be able to discriminate against anyone and religious beliefs have no politics in the Miss California family." - Keith Lewis, co-director of the Miss CA pageant

So, Mr. Lewis believes that all religions should be able to ordain whatever unions they see fit, unless those religions believe that marriage is between a man and a woman.

"I think it's ridiculous that she got first runner-up. That is not the value of 95 percent of the people in this audience. Look around this audience and tell me how many gay men there are." - Scott Ihrig, a self professed gay man who attended the pageant with his partner.

Mr. Ihrig, it's the Miss USA pageant, not the Miss Gay Hollywood pageant.

Many in the media are blaming Miss California's loss on her answer. I am sure that the mainstream media and all the gossip blog world are all up in arms over her 'hateful' answer - but I won't waste the electrons on my computer checking them out.

Again, I don't care about pageants at all. What I do care about is this blatant example of the hypocrisy of the far left in this country - freedom of speech is only applicable if the speech agrees with their viewpoint. Freedom of thought is only acceptable if it mirrors their own. Freedom of religion is only celebrated if it is the religion they want to pursue - all other religions are racist hate spewing homophobes. If anything does not agree with their stance on anything, then that thing (or person) is evil and to be stomped down.

It seems to me that many of the most outspoken gay and lesbian members of our society have taken the hatred that was once shown to them (and sadly sometimes still is) and turned it around on everyone who doesn't agree with them.

I don't agree with same sex marriage. It is against my morals and beliefs. That does not mean that I harbor resentment or hatred towards gays and lesbians. It does mean that I have a real problem with members of that community who shout as loudly as they can that I am evil for my beliefs.

And, for those pricks who think otherwise, I dedicate this picture of Miss California on the runway last night. Very nice looking young lady.