BOOKMARK, COMMENT, ORGANIZE, SEARCH

IT'S SIMPLE AND IT WORKS

Popular Categories

software (9409)
internet (9249)
business (8210)
online (6824)
health (6764)
free (5978)
home (5803)
news (5665)
tools (5066)
web (4912)
web2.0 (4201)
game (4149)
& (3840)
shopping (3790)
social (3616)
games (3516)
golf (3448)
default (3376)
blog (3205)
search (3120)
design (3102)
arizona (3094)
music (2910)
lasvegas (2880)
mortgage (2856)
myrtlebeach (2855)
golfswing (2852)
golfclubs (2851)
desktop (2843)
credit (2819)
windows (2726)
download (2700)
mp3 (2606)
file (2502)
management (2450)
screen (2440)
bookmarks (2394)
video (2374)
security (2321)
money (2251)
loans (2243)
loan (2223)
screensaver (2159)
utilities (2150)
email (2118)
education (2104)
image (1968)
debt (1942)
finance (1915)
to (1907)

Reverberating Sounds of Upheaval

by Pat Estelle

posted in News and Society

Syndicate This Article
Perfektioniere Deinen Look mit der Carli Bybel Deluxe Edition - Lidschatten & Highlighter Palette. Eine Kollektion aus 21 hochpigmentierten Farben. Bei BH Cosmetics für 24,45 €.
Code: 668R8WH. Need to use promocode. The discount is available only for certain category. The promotion is available for all customers of the store.There is no minimum order value.
It seems ludicrous to me that same-sex marriage advocates are comparing the Supreme Court's recent same-sex marriage decision to that of ending slavery. That's absolutely absurd! Have homosexuals ever been discriminated against in the way black Americans have been? Have gays been subjected to torture, beatings, rape, starvation, and death by burning or hanging? I see no correlation between slavery and same-sex marriage.
And the Church's position on divorce, once condemned, but having been adapted over time, is not the same as the Church altering its stance on two males or two females marrying. In the eyes of many Christian churches, divorce, and remarriage, is still a sin, though legal; and abortion is a sin, though legal. It's my belief that same-sex marriage will remain a sin in the eyes of God and the Church. Of course a decadent society cannot relate to SIN, and the word itself will likely appear in dictionaries as 'archaic' or 'obsolete' in the not-so-distant future. And unless positive changes occur, God may also become obsolete in the eyes of America's majority.
"Love wins," "Free at last," "We've come to our senses," "It's the right thing," "Hooray for equality," and similar phrases have been bandied about by many who approve of the Court's decision that made same-sex marriage the law of the land.
Such phrases seem inappropriate, except possibly that of equality. Having acquaintances and relatives who are gay, I have an understanding of what is claimed to be discrimination because some homosexuals of the past were denied a job or housing simply because of their sexual orientation. Of course, such discrimination was deemed an unlawful practice long before the Court's recent decision.
I certainly agree that being denied a job or housing because one is gay is egregious and inexcusable. But I seriously doubt the fact that being homosexual (in most instances) was ascertained simply by appearance. Perhaps the gay individual made an unintentional disclosure? Or perhaps was of the opinion that he/she should divulge that information. But why should that be necessary?
Does a heterosexual state to a potential employer, "I'm heterosexual" during the course of a job interview?
Of course those possibilities are not forbidden by law. But here are a few that are, and should continue to be:
Does a purveyor of child pornography tell a potential employer, or a realtor that this is his avocation? Is his sexual love of children his right?
And how about men who "love young boys?" Against the law, of course. Should it be? After all, that's love, isn't it?
Shouldn't plural marriages be legal? Again, that's love, and the pursuit of happiness. An individual can certainly love more than one person in a romantic way, can't he?
Suppose a brother and sister want to marry? Their love for each other is more than the natural love among siblings---they're 'in love.' Why can't their marriage be legal? If they're intelligent enough to realize that sexual intercourse could produce mentally deficient children, then they can adopt, as many homosexuals do. The male could have a vasectomy, or the female could choose tubal ligation. Then why shouldn't they be allowed to marry?
And what about a father who wishes to marry his adult daughter? They're in love, and want legal sanction of what heretofore has been illicit sex, commonly known as incest. Why isn't that permissible?
Shouldn't nudists be allowed to parade around the streets without clothes, and be served in restaurants and other places of business? They love not having the constrictions of clothing, and are definitely pursuing happiness.
The Declaration of Independence states that all of us are endowed by our creator with "certain unalienable rights," and that among these are "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness."
What about the Preamble to the Constitution? In part, it states that the Constitution is meant to "insure domestic Tranquility," "establish Justice," and "secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity."
And doesn't the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provide "equal protection?"
Recently everyone seems to have the wisdom, the knowledge, and the ability to channel our founding fathers, which gives them the right to interpret all of these declarations.
So it seems then that our Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and the Pledge of Allegiance provide "Love," "Pursuit of Happiness," "Domestic Tranquility," "Justice," "Blessings," and "Freedom" to anyone and everyone in their search for love and happiness.
Clearly, I'm being facetious, and in no way advocate action prohibited by the laws of the land. But I'm once again reminded of several incidents where, based on their religious beliefs, and having refused services requested by gay couples, people have been fined large sums of money, and threatened with incarceration. Several have lost their business, and their livelihood. Many have been verbally and sometimes physically abused. More than a few now live in fear of even mentioning their religious beliefs, and certainly make no mention of their opposition to gay marriage. Is that just, is that fair in our land of the free and home of the brave?
If gay people who demand some type of service from religious individuals whose beliefs preclude that service, why aren't they, too, protected by anti-discrimination laws? Why, now, is protection under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution very selective in applying those freedoms? The Amendment clearly states that "no law shall be made which impedes the free exercise of religion."
Where then is "equal protection," where is "freedom of speech," and where is "freedom of religion?" A double standard seems to be in play here. The future of America looks frighteningly unclear, murky.
In the pursuit of happiness, my suggestions just might grant and sustain a happy life far longer than same-sex marriage: pass legislation forcing equal pay for equal work; jobs for everyone capable of working; employers must pay a decent wage; ensure adequate/livable quarters and conditions for all people; end late-term abortions; deport to home country criminal immigrants; provide the best possible education for everyone; offer fewer perks for politicians.
About the Author:
Code: MT4271. Get $2.04 discount for Electronic Music Dazzling Light Dancing Rotating Robot Children Toy Birthday Gift
Camisas do Palmeiras - Frete grátis Venham aproveitar!
Code: BZCL6. 6$ off si pedidos acima de 50$

Newest Articles in News and Society

Other articles by Pat Estelle