A Federal Judge in the "Gayest" City in the world, San Francisco, is now deciding whether or not "We the People" have the right to keep marriage between a man and a woman. I am not a betting man, but, if I were, I would bet that we are going to have this shoved down our throat just like abortion, euthanasia, pornography, narcotics and every other imaginable evil required to drag us and our families deeper into the bottomless cesspool.
I quote the following:
"The first federal trial on the constitutionality of state bans on same-sex marriage got under way with former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson quoting the U.S. Supreme Court's own lofty description of matrimony to demonstrate what his clients are being denied. Olson represents two same-sex couples suing to overturn Proposition 8, California's voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage." (source)
The judge on the case stated the following:
"If California would simply get out of the marriage business and classify everyone as a domestic partnership would that solve the problem?" the judge asked." (Ibid)
Maybe the judge should just classify everyone as a homosexual sexual deviant. The above statement shows the Hegelian/Luciferian Dialectic in action. Manipulate the issue with two manufactured extremes and then plot a course in the middle. All heterosexuals that don't want homosexual relationships classified as "normal" have been labeled as " right-wing terrorists" by our effeminate global elite.
On the other extreme we have the dysfunctional individuals that are seemingly unaware of their anatomical makeup, or if aware, have not learned the difference between a colon and a uterus (Hint: the uterus can get pregnant). Societies that are not run by Sexual deviants protect the institution of marriage as the perfect environment to raise a child. Marriage exists for the child's sake.
Somehow, like those that try to impregnate colons, heterosexual deviants concept of marriage has now become a barrier to more frequent sex with more multiple partners.
Its all about us, isn't it. In another clearly elucidated misdirect:
"Charles Cooper, a lawyer for sponsors of the ban approved by voters in 2008, said in his opening statement that it's too difficult to know the impact of gay marriage on traditional marriage because the practice is still so new." (Ibid.)
Allow me to educate this defender of mass confusion:
1. Keeping "Same-sex partners" in a long-term relationship is like herding cats in heat. They never come "home" because they are never sure where exactly that is.
2. Its not "marriage" they want. If they wanted it, they could have it without violating the law. Simply date members of the opposite sex whose anatomy is different from your own.
3. Why should society spend its resources on individuals who choose a proven method of shortening their lives?
4. If gay marriage is sanctioned, than gays would be entitled to collect "Survivor benefits" through Social Security. This is the real issue here folks. Survivor benefits allow a surviving spouse to collect on the deceased spouse's life after retirement or while raising kids. This is thousands and thousands of dollars annually in most cases.
Item 4 is what they are really after. Its not enough that they raid Medicaid and Medicare with diseases they contract from their chosen lifestyle. Yes, AIDS is one of them, so is Hepatitis and there are others. They take the risk and society pays the bill.
We no longer reward "radical" heterosexual extremists that actually give more than they take from society. We are forced to feed the very cancers that will ultimately destroy us. This is the result of compromising with evil. It doesn't want just a piece of you, it wants the whole thing.
