Free Birth Control is no more Necessary for a Healthy Life than having Breast Implants

Posted by PITHOCRATES - April 20th, 2014

Week in Review

Gays and lesbians have fought for same-sex marriage.  Because they want to be like traditional couples.  A man and a woman entering wedded bliss.  With all of the legal and employer spousal benefits that come with it.  Even while feminists decry the institution of marriage as enslaving women into a loveless relationship where women are cooks in the kitchen, maids in the house and whores in the bedroom.

Bradley Manning became Chelsea Manning after being arrested for leaking classified documents.  Chelsea is now asking for the government to pay for hormone treatment therapy to become physically a woman.  And that denying this costly treatment was cruel and unusual punishment.

So there is a lot of pressure to help people become what they want to be.  And some argue that tax money should pay to help them.  As well as rewrite our laws.  But how far should this go?  How far should we go to help people who are unhappy with their circumstance in life (see Men are funding breast implants for women they’ve never met in exchange for their attention online. That’s pathetic by William Henderson posted 4/16/2014 on The Telegraph)?

I’ve just been reading an article about a woman in the north of England whose breast implants were paid for by strangers. In just three months, 23-year-old Gemini Smith from Northumbria raised the £4,450 needed to transform her from a 34A to a 34DD, and it’s all thanks to MyFreeImplants.com – or rather, the men who use it. This is a website for women who feel unhappy in the chest department but lack the funds to change it. They create a profile explaining why they would like breast implants and why they can’t afford them, and are given a dollar for each message they receive; men are invited to buy chat credits in order to send them messages, and are offered “… direct access to thousands of women seeking friendship and your help in obtaining the body they’ve always dreamed of”.

Should the taxpayers pay for breast implants, too?  As having small breasts is causing some women pain in their lives.  For they don’t feel as attractive as women with larger breasts.  As men tend to look at women with larger breasts.  Because men are pigs.  Yet these women want these pigs to look at them.  And suffer pain when they don’t.

One wonders where the feminists would fall on this issue.  As providing free birth control is no more necessary for a healthy life than having breast implants.  But women getting breast implants are seeking acceptance based on how attractive men find them.  Which runs contrary to feminism.  Much like feeding women free birth control so they can please as many men as possible sexually.  Placing a woman’s sexuality at the core of her being.  Again, something that kind of runs contrary to feminism.  And the left.

Which makes the left’s obsession with same-sex marriage puzzling.  As they are trying everything within their power to help women live without having to marry a man.  While at the same time they are doing everything they can to help same-sex couples do what they try so hard to prevent women from having to do.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , ,

Sperm Donor must pay Child Support for Lesbian Couple’s Child

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 26th, 2014

Week in Review

Proponents of same-sex marriage say there is no difference with it and traditional marriage.  And that same-sex couples can be parents just as traditional couples can.  There’s just the matter of getting a child.  As a same-sex couple cannot conceive a child.  But as long as women give up their unwanted babies for adoption instead of aborting them a same-sex couple should be able to adopt a child.  Or a lesbian couple could find a sperm donor (see Court: Marotta is a father, not merely a sperm donor by Steve Fry posted 1/22/2014 on cjonline).

A Topeka man who donated sperm to a lesbian couple is the presumptive father to a baby one of the woman bore and is subject to paying child support, a Shawnee County District Court judge ruled Wednesday.

In her written decision, District Court Judge Mary Mattivi said that because William Marotta and the same-sex couple failed to secure the services of a physician during the artificial insemination process, he wasn’t entitled to the same protections given other sperm donors under Kansas law…

Marotta contended he was only a sperm donor to a same-sex couple seeking a child, but the Kansas Department for Children and Families argued he is a father who owes child support to his daughter. The girl is 4 years old…

The Kansas Department for Children and Families filed the case in October 2012 seeking to have Marotta declared the father of a girl Schreiner bore in 2009.

Marotta opposed the action, saying he didn’t intend to be the child’s father, and that he had signed a contract waiving his parental rights and responsibilities while agreeing to donate sperm in a plastic cup to Schreiner and Angela Bauer, who was then her partner. Marotta contacted the women after they placed a Craigslist ad seeking a sperm donor.

The state has been seeking to have Marotta declared the child’s father so he can be responsible for about $6,000 in public assistance the state provided, as well as future child support.

This makes a good case against same-sex couple adoption.  For without a blood tie to the baby it is apparently easy to walk away from it.  Even if one made a commitment to raise a child together.  Like with this lesbian couple.  The partner to the mother of the baby left.  Without providing for that baby.  So the mother and baby became wards of the state.  Which is why the state went after the sperm donor for child support.  Even though he had an agreement with the lesbian couple that he would have no responsibility for their child.

There are strict guidelines for adopting a baby.  To make sure the child goes to a good home.  With parents who have the financial wherewithal to raise a child.  Apparently there is no such requirement for the donation of sperm.  Which can place a child in a home with parents who do not have the financial wherewithal to raise a child.  At least it would appear so.

A marriage between a man and a woman is about children.  To conceive and bring children into the world.  In a partnership that facilitates the raising of children.  To give them a last name.  A stay-at-home mother gets added to her husband’s employer benefits.  So she can stay at home and work without pay while being covered by her working husband’s benefits.  Where a mother and a father can both raise their children.  Each teaching them what they uniquely can.  Giving them as complete a childhood as possible.  Tied forever to their children by blood.  This is what marriage is for.  Children.  All the employer benefits of marriage.  All the legal advantages of marriage.  All the tax advantages of marriage.  They’re all there for one reason.  To facilitate the raising of children.  So parents raise their children.  And not the state.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Left’s War on the Culture and Traditions of Western Civilization

Posted by PITHOCRATES - June 27th, 2013

Politics 101

The Left sees Traditional Marriage as a way to make Women Cooks in the Kitchen and Whores in the Bedroom

What’s the difference between conservatives and liberals?  Conservatives believe in the genius of the Founding Fathers and embrace the U.S. Constitution.  Liberals constantly disparage the Founding Fathers as rich white men who owned slaves.  And they bristle at the restraints the Constitution places on them.  Conservatives believe in limited government.  Liberals believe in big government.  Privilege.  And feel they are part of an aristocratic class who are exempt from the laws they do not like.  Conservatives stand on principle.  While liberals will sacrifice principle in the pursuit of power.

The Sixties gave us the Sexual Revolution.  Where sex outside of marriage was not only okay it was better.  Hippies put sex into everyday ordinary life.  Where sex was as causal as an afternoon greeting.  Contraception and women’s liberation made the Seventies swing.  No one was getting married.  They were just living together.  And having a lot of sex.  With a lot of different people.  For it wasn’t the 1950s anymore.  No.  Women were no longer going to be sexually objectified or trapped into soul-sucking marriages.  Which was all the institution of marriage did.  Oppressed women.

The Seventies changed all of that.  Women could be whatever they wanted to be.  And sleep with whoever they wanted to sleep with.  For they now had the pill.  And when that failed they had abortion.  It was truly a time for feminists.  As they could be more sexualized than they had ever been before.  Those who did get married could ‘swing’ with other married couples.  That is, swap wives for sex.  Feminists persuaded women to be independent.  To have careers.  Not to get married.  Not to have children.  For that would only subjugate them to some man.  Where they would end up a cook in the kitchen.  And a whore in the bedroom.  Serving him.  One man.  And taking care of a long string of snot-nosed brats sucking the life out of them.  This is how the left sees traditional marriage.

Laws encouraged Marriage to Provide more People to Till the Soil and more Soldiers to Defend the Land

So clearly the left had launched a war on the institution of marriage during the Sixties and Seventies.  And beyond.  For it was everything that was wrong with America.  It destroyed a woman’s identity.  She even lost her last name.  No.  It was better for a woman to remain free.  And strong.  To enjoy sex when she wanted to enjoy sex.  Not only when society said she should.  In the marital chamber.  She should live alone.  Or live with someone outside the institution of marriage.  So she could remain free.  She should have a career.  And use birth control and abortion to terminate any pregnancy that could interfere with her career.  To remove any reason to consider ever getting married.  As well as enjoy the explosion of sexual transmitted diseases her new liberation gave her.

And yet as bad as marriage is the left is trying to make same-sex marriage a Constitutional right.  Despite fighting to destroy the institution of marriage for some 3 decades or more.  And still fights hard to help women avoid the institution and to keep her family tree a barren one.  But when it comes to gays and lesbians who want to get married that changes everything.  Marriage is then a beautiful institution where two people can profess their undying love to each other.  And denying marital bliss to same-sex couples is discriminatory.  Mean.  And just plain medieval.

Conservatives oppose same-sex marriage because they don’t want to change the institution of marriage.  Which has a tradition that dates back to the beginning of civilization.  While there is no such tradition of same-sex marriage.  Marriage created the family.  Allowing a man and a woman to raise a family.  So they can raise, provide for and nurture their children.  For unlike most animals in nature whose young can go off on their own after a year or so the human race must spend years rearing their offspring.  Which required two parents.  One to raise and nurture.  And one to provide.  Marriage also provided for inheritance.  To transfer property down generations.  Marriage provided a last name to their children.  In time religion entered the marriage ceremony.  Adding more tradition.  Then came laws to encourage people to marry and raise children.  To expand the population.  To provide more people to till the soil.  And more soldiers to defend the land.  As well as increasing the tax base.

The Left attacks the Culture and Traditions of the Political Opposition as they cannot Defeat Them in the Arena of Ideas

So the institution of marriage served many purposes.  The most important was to raise children.  Because if you couldn’t replace the people killed in battle or died from disease or famine countries would collapse.  And because it took so long to rear children traditions and laws developed to facilitate child rearing.  Some traditions go back thousands of years.  While there is no comparative traditions for same-sex marriage.  Or utilitarian purpose for same-sex marriage.  Such as expanding the population.

But the left shows no respect for tradition.  Unless it’s for a lost tribe in the Amazon that practices cannibalism and human sacrifice.  No, that tradition they’ll respect with the reverence of religion.  And actively oppose any interruption into their culture or traditions.  Even if they are sacrificing young virgins.  They’ll fight to protect their culture and tradition.  But they have no such respect or reverence for the culture and traditions of Western Civilization.

So the left is many things.  But one thing it is not is consistent when it comes to principle.  They attack the institution of marriage for those who currently enjoy that institution.  While embracing it for those who don’t have it.  They will do whatever they can to prevent women from coming down with the ‘disease’ of pregnancy.  While championing same-sex couple adoption.  They have no tolerance or respect for culture and tradition.  Unless it is culture and tradition not found in Western Civilization.  Proving that everything to the left is political.  And everything they do serves one purpose.  To increase their power.  And they do that by attacking the culture and traditions of the political opposition.  Which they do to destroy them.  As they cannot defeat them in the arena of ideas.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Marriage, Babies and Taxes

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 28th, 2013

Politics 101

The Women’s Movement encouraged Women to Choose a Career over Having Babies

It is common for a married couple planning to have children to both work.  To put as much money into the bank for a down payment on a house to raise their family in.  In a nice neighborhood with good schools.  After they buy that house and have their first child it is common for the woman to quit working to stay home and take care of their newborn child.  And the other children they have.  While the husband continues to work.

The women’s movement changed that.  It encouraged women to have fewer babies (or none at all) and to have a career instead.  Those who had children were encouraged to return to work as soon as possible.  To just dump their kids into daycare and continue their careers.  But it doesn’t always work that way.  Sometimes a woman determined not to let her children interfere with her career has a change of heart after having her first child.  Deciding not to return to work.  Choosing to, instead, stay at home and raise her children.  And not dump them into daycare.

This, of course, causes problems for employers.  Making it more risky to hire women.  Especially in this litigious world.  They have to hold a woman’s job for her when she goes on maternity leaves.  And if her job is a critical job, like doing payroll, others will have to split up her job responsibilities.  Perhaps hiring a temp to pick up the less critical tasks (filing, answering phones, etc.).  For mistakes in payroll do not make happy employees.  And mistakes in payroll taxes can cause some very costly problems with the government.  If a woman doesn’t plan on returning to work after having her baby the business can hire a new employee.  And in her last weeks before leaving to have her child she can train her replacement for an orderly transfer of her responsibilities.  Something she can’t do if she changes her mind while on maternity leave.

In the Marriage Contract the Wife gives up her Career to Raise the Children while her Husband provides Financial Support

This can be a reason why men earn more than women.  Because there is less of a chance of his changing his mind to be a stay-at-home parent.  It happens.  But not as often as it happens with women.  Because women have a biological clock ticking.  Which can greatly influence her thinking on her long-held career plans.  For a woman has to leave work to have a child.  And to recover from the birth.  Men don’t.  Their lives can go on with little change.  And because a woman has to take time off she spends more time bonding with her newborn child.  Which is a powerful force.  Mothers are very protective of their babies.  And even though she had all intentions of returning to work having the welfare of her newborn dependent on her can change her best laid plans.

Of course, leaving the workforce not only affects her employer it affects the household budget.  For that lost paycheck can make life more difficult at home.  Forcing the new family to get by on less.  Government understands this.  And they design the tax code to help families raise children.  Because the government needs people to have babies.  And they need them to have more than two.  For if they only have two the population will not continue to grow.  These children will only replace their parents.  Not expand the tax base to help pay for an expanding menu of government benefits going to an aging population.  But having more than two children is very expensive.  Which is why married families get a lot of deductions and credits in the tax code.  To help offset the high cost of having children.  So they will have more children.

And there are other legal issues and traditions to help families.  Such as the baby’s last name.  A woman may hyphenate her name when married.  But you can’t do that with children.  For in a generation or two a person’s name will grow so long with multiple hyphens that it will make it difficult to use on forms, to sign a contract or a check.  Put on a nametag.  Tradition has the father being the financial provider.  As the father is not physically impacted by pregnancy.  He can keep working.  And providing.  So giving the child the father’s last name makes it easy for the child to go through life.  And makes it clear that the father is financially responsible for that child.  Just like it’s a man’s work benefits that cover his wife and children.  Because in the contract of marriage the wife gives up her career to do something more important.  Raise their children.  But she can only do that if her husband provides the income, the health care benefits, house, car, groceries, etc., the family needs.

If Same-Sex Marriage is about an Unfair Tax Code the Left could just vote Republican so we can Lower Taxes for Everyone

The institution of marriage developed to help a man and a woman raise children.  Having children came first.  People have been having children long before they even talked or used tools.  Then civilization advanced.  The economy grew more complex.  This advanced civilization was costly.  Especially when raising children. Then the institution of marriage came along to help families have children.  Governments and business help families have and raise children.  For we need families to have and raise children.  Businesses need an expanding population.  For a business needs more people to grow.  To buy the goods and services of their expanding business.  Just as government needs an expanding population.  To pay the taxes to fund an expanding government.  An expanding population translates into a growing and prosperous economy.  And a growing and more generous government.  Because the more people there are the more people government can tax.

Men and women have married without raising a family.  Yet they still get some of the benefits we developed to help married people raise children.  Such as one spouse being covered under the other’s employer’s health insurance benefit.  Raising the business’ costs without providing an expanding population benefit for this additional cost.  And it’s the same for government.  A married couple may get some favorable tax benefits that cost the government while not providing an expanding population benefit for this additional cost.  So there is a short-term benefit for a childless marriage.  The woman doesn’t leave the workforce.  She builds her career and earns more income.  Providing more tax revenue.  But there is no long-term benefit.  For when this couple leaves the workforce there will be no one to replace them.  So while they start consuming Social Security and Medicare benefits they have not added new people to the workforce to pay for these.

Understanding how and why we have the institution of marriage makes the current same-sex marriage debate puzzling to say the least.  For marriage is not about civil rights.  It’s about lowering the cost of raising children.  Which both business and government needs.  For if couples don’t have more than two children then the population will no longer expand.  And it will age.  Making it more costly for government.  While providing a shrinking customer base for businesses.  A couple that does not bring new children into the world provides no return on the cost of the marriage benefits they receive.  And a same-sex marriage will be no different than a childless marriage between a man and a woman.  From an economic/government funding point of view. They will not help grow the economy.  They will not lower the future cost of government.  And there won’t be a legal or traditional need for giving a newborn child a last name.  As they can’t procreate.

If procreation is out of the equation people can enter committed relationships without the institution of marriage.  During the sexual revolution the Left belittled the institution of marriage and asked why anyone needed a piece of paper to sanction their love.  And these people lived together flaunting convention.  And tradition.  Using birth control and the recently legalized abortion to make sure no children resulted from these new living arrangements.  These marriage-less committed relationships.  Now marriage is the number one issue of the Left.  If it’s for same-sex couples the institution they hated and worked so hard to destroy is now the greatest thing in the world.  And on top of everything else the Left, who supports higher taxes, are arguing that the tax code unfairly discriminates against same-sex couples.  If that is the basis of this being a civil rights issue the Left could just vote Republican so we can lower taxes for everyone.  Then they could have everything they want.  The free love of the sexual revolution.  Low taxes.  And no reason to get married.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Usefulness of Same-Sex Marriage to the Left

Posted by PITHOCRATES - March 21st, 2013

Politics 101

The Clintons and President Obama opposed Same-Sex Marriage when Campaigning because of Blacks and Hispanics

Hillary Clinton is now in favor of same-sex marriage.  After being against it when running for president.  Just like her husband.  Who was against it while running for president.  Even signing the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 into law while he was president.  This Clinton-era law defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman.  But Bill Clinton now supports same-sex marriage.  President Obama made it categorically clear when campaigning that he believed marriage was the union of one woman and one man.  But he has since changed his mind, too.  Why?

The Williams Institute looked at five surveys that show anywhere between 1% and 2.5% of the population is gay or lesbian.  It’s about twice this number if you include bisexual people.  Which we can ignore when it comes to marriage.  For if you identify yourself as bisexual it pretty much excludes marriage from your future.  For a marriage is the union of two people.  And the only way to be a practicing bisexual in a marriage is to cheat on your spouse.  Or have an open marriage.  Because your spouse can be only one sex.  Which is not really a union between two people.  Just a loose association.  So with only 1-2.5% of the population being gay or lesbian why the full-court press by the Left?

More times than not when the issue gets on a ballot the people vote it down.  So same-sex marriage is not a burning issue with the people.  Which explains why the Clintons and President Obama were opposed to same-sex marriage when they were seeking elected office.  And why they changed their position only after it wouldn’t affect their campaign.  For they needed the help of two blocks of voters to win their elections.  Blacks.  And Hispanics.  Two very religious blocks who oppose same-sex marriage.  So not only does the general populace oppose same-sex marriage so do two critical constituencies of the Left oppose it.  So I ask again.  Why the full-court press by everyone on the Left?

The Left exploits the LGBT Community just like they exploited the Black Community for Political Gain

The Left hates Christianity.  And Republicans.  Because a lot of them are Christians.  They hate the Religious Right.  Who moralize.  Who oppose free birth control for our kids in high school.  And abortion.  The Left says Christianity oppresses women.  Forcing them into marriages instead of having a career.  And they hate the institution of marriage.  Some on the far Left go so far as to call sex in marriage rape.  Because a married woman is a second class citizen in a male-dominated society.  Mere chattel.  With no rights.  There is no love in marriage.  Only subjugation.  The Left can’t fathom the idea of any woman choosing to be a stay at home mom.  Yet they’re all for same-sex marriage and the adoption of children by same-sex couples.  For apparently there is no oppression of a stay-at-home spouse raising babies if that person is in a same-sex relationship.  For if it’s a same-sex marriage then all the traditional trappings of marriage apply.  And it’s a beautiful thing.

And now we see what the big deal about same-sex marriage is.  It’s not about that 1-2.5% of the population.  It’s about using the issue to destroy the Republican Party.  And Christianity.  For Republicans and Christians don’t oppose same-sex marriage.  They oppose lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) people.  At least that’s the message the Left is putting out there.  Especially to our young people.  Who overwhelmingly vote Democrat.  Who when asked what percentage they think the U.S. population is LGBT they respond with numbers as high as 20%.  Or 30%.  Something the Left doesn’t discourage.  In fact, they encourage this false understanding.  By pushing the boundaries in entertainment wherever they can.  Like that story about a real estate agent who has only two properties listed for sale. One on the road into town.  And one on the road out of town.  Because everyone driving on that road sees his signs they assume he is the biggest agent in town.  Because his signs appear to be everywhere.  So when LGBT appear on television and in the movies people see them everywhere.  And assume a large percentage of the population is LGBT.  So they feel that the opposition to same-sex marriage is not about legal and tax issues as much as oppressing a large percentage of the populace.  They see the Religious Right not as a defender of traditional marriage but something akin to the Nazi Party trying to purge undesirables from their good Christian society.  In addition to them to being evil rich people who want to take food away from hungry children.  And, of course, racists.

So the Left exploits the LGBT community for political gain.  Just like they exploited the black community for political gain.  After being the party of slavery and Jim Crowe Laws the Left changed their image.  From hating blacks to loving them.  Especially with their Great Society.  In particular with Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).  Which disintegrated the black family.  The state replaced the father in the black family.  Removing the positive male role model from these kids’ lives.  Moved these single mothers into projects in the inner city.  Which became rife with drugs and crime.  Problems that soon found their way into the schools.  Making it a struggle for a kid in these schools to get the education they needed to get a job or go on to college.  Which is why crime is rampant in the inner cities.  And unemployment is highest among black young men.  This is what the state did to the black community.  It’s horrible.  But it did accomplish their objective.  The black community tends to vote Democrat.  Because the Democrats are always looking out for them.  Giving them things like AFDC.  While Republicans are racist Nazis who want to take things away from them.  Just because they are black.

The Left paints Republicans as Nazis trying to Purge Undesirables from their Good Christian Society

The Left wants to give out free birth control to high school kids.  And provide access to abortion.  Because there are few things kids want to do more than have fun grownup style.  And few things let them do that like free birth control and abortion.  Now with the popularizing of the LGBT lifestyle the Left is encouraging kids to be open and to explore bisexuality.  That there is nothing wrong with this lifestyle.  Or experimenting.  Which is tragic.  Because being LGBT is not like trying a different type of food for a little variety in life.  It’s not a causal dalliance.  Kids growing up gay struggle with their sexual identity.  And they try to hide it.  Because kids can be cruel.

A college student secretly recorded a gay encounter of his roommate and made it available for anyone to see.  It was so horrible an experience to live with that the kid didn’t live with it.  He committed suicide.  Which isn’t uncommon in the LGBT community.  For being LGBT is not just a lot of sex and fun.  It can be a living hell coming to terms with who you are.  And then telling your friends and family.  It’s one thing if you’re a celebrity in today’s pop culture.  But it’s another story when you’re just some kid already feeling isolated and alone.  Even though today’s culture is more accepting than it ever has been there are still a lot of cruel people out there.  And a lot of digital recording devices.  A woman who lets loose on spring break only to have a perspective employer pull up pornographic images of her when Googling her name is bad.  But being thrown out of the closet at the same time?  Try imaging that hell.

So the Left wants to do for LGBT people what they did for blacks.  Get as many of them as possible to fear and/or hate Republicans.  So they vote Democrat.  Even if it destroys these people.  For they don’t care about these people.  All they care about is politics.  And power.  Which is why they had no qualms over destroying the black family.  Or encouraging a lifestyle of anything goes.  Because who are we to say what is right or wrong?  Kids are going to have sex no matter what we say.  So we should do the only responsible thing we can do.  Help them to have sex.  And, yes, we can warn them about that sex resulting in an unplanned pregnancy or the myriad venereal diseases they could catch as long as it’s in the context of using birth control or having an abortion.  And we don’t moralize.  But we have to be a little more careful about warning them that their sexual life could end up on some pornographic website.  Because that would just be fear-mongering.  And that’s not what the Left wants people to fear.  They want them to fear Republicans.  And Christians.  Who are little more than Nazis trying to purge undesirables from their good Christian society.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT117: “If a gay gene is identified an abortion of a gay fetus will be labeled a hate crime.” -Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - May 11th, 2012

Fundamental Truth

The Left opposes Traditional Marriage but supports Same-Sex Marriage for the Money

According to the Williams Institute at the UCLA School of Law there are approximately 9 million lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people in the United States.  Based on a population of 311,591,917 that comes to approximately 3% of the population.  Which is a small number.  Which explains why same-sex marriage ballot initiatives are so often defeated.  Some people are opposed to same-sex marriage.  Some are opposed to making changes to existing laws to accommodate 3% of the population.  Whatever their reason voting majorities are against it.  Despite this same-sex marriage is a big issue.  Especially for some politicians.  In particular those on the Left.  As evidenced by President Obama’s recent evolution from being opposed to same-sex marriage to being in favor of it.  Which is puzzling when you consider the Left’s position on marriage in general.

They don’t like it.  Especially if it leads to a woman giving up a chance for a career to instead stay at home and raise a family.  For these women are not feminists.  These are enemies to feminism.  The Left has given women everything they could possible ask for.  So they don’t have to get married and become some man’s chattel.  Birth control.  Abortion.  Child support.  Public housing.  Etc.  Everything to help a woman avoid the tyranny of marriage.  Because marriage is nothing more than bondage.  A desire to keep women barefoot and pregnant.  To keep them cooks in the kitchen and whores in the bedroom.  While men go out and live life.  While coming home to a surrogate mother to attend to all of their needs.  Which is why the Left so opposes the repugnant institution of marriage.  Unless it’s for a same-sex couple.  Then it’s the greatest thing since sliced bread.

So why is the Left so opposed to traditional marriage but all for same-sex marriage?  Money.  There is a lot of money in the LGBT community.  Because there is a lot of talent in the LGBT community.  People who go on to great stardom.  And become rich.  Who want it all.  Including marriage and a family.  So though small in numbers they are large in money.  So by supporting same-sex marriage the Left is trading votes for money.  Votes that for the most part they’ve already lost.  Traditional conservatives and Christians.  But they run a risk with this policy.  With the Independents and moderates.  The political center.  For there are a lot of traditional marriage advocates in the political center.  As there are in the black and Hispanic communities.  Who have some strong religious values.  And support the traditional family.

As we Practice Selective Breeding we’ll Breed the Different Gradually out of Existence

These are very complex and polarizing issues.  For no one wants to be labeled a bigot.  Well, some don’t mind.  Sadly.  But the majority do not want that label.  So on the one hand they want everyone to be able to have and enjoy what they can.  Which makes it difficult for them to see severely injured veterans.  And people stricken early in life with a debilitating disease.  Who will never be able to have and enjoy what they have.  But on the other hand they are devout in their religious beliefs.  And it’s a matter of conscious that they can’t ignore.  For the same reason that they oppose abortion.  For they see it as the destruction of a human life.  Even if doctors determine their child will be born with a severe birth defect they oppose abortion.  And they will carry that baby to term.  While some on the Left say the kinder more humane thing to do would be to abort that pregnancy.  For what kind of quality of life can that child expect?

Scientists have been unlocking the mysteries of DNA.  And have identified a lot of the genes that make us who we are.  Now here’s an interesting thought exercise.  Let’s suppose they identify a lesbian or gay gene.  As well as a bisexual and transgender gene.  And a doctor tells a heterosexual couple that they are going to have an LGBT child.  A couple that votes for politicians on the left side of the aisle.  Who have no moral problem with abortion.  For they are staunch defenders of women’s health and reproductive rights.  This couple is aware of how hard it is for an LGBT child to grow up and come to terms with their sexual identity.  Especially in this cruel and bigoted world.  Some of these children suffer horrible.  And carry scars into adulthood.  What if this couple chooses to do the kinder and more humane thing?  And choose not to bring this child to term?  Would that be a hate crime?

People are aborting pregnancies when a doctor tells them their child will be born with a birth defect.  And there are lot of people aborting pregnancies when the sex isn’t ‘right’.  As some cultures favor a male son.  So when a sonogram shows a female in the womb many choose abortion.  So would they abort an LGBT pregnancy?  Perhaps.  For we do live in a cruel and bigoted world.  Let’s hope it doesn’t come to this.  Though we are beginning to practice selective breeding.  As people are buying eggs and sperm to create the ‘perfect’ child.  It’s sad to consider what we may lose as this technology advances.  For we will be leaving behind a better world.  To enter the surreal.  Where people begin to look like everyone else.  An Orwellian existence where conformity is the rule.  And they breed the different gradually out of existence.

The Same-Sex Marriage and the Traditional Marriage Groups will Join Together in Opposing LGBT Abortion

Whether an LGBT abortion would be a hate crime or not it would still be criminal.  For can you imagine aborting a pregnancy that would become another Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky?  Had his parents not brought him to term because he was going to be gay we would not have Swan LakeThe NutcrackerRomeo and JulietThe Seasons (Les saisons).  And the list goes on.  Then there is West Side Story.  One of the greatest musicals of all time.  Music by Leonard Bernstein.  Lyrics by Stephen Sondheim.  Choreography by Jerome Robbins.  All gay.  Bernstein also turned the classic Candide into an opera.  Sondheim is perhaps the greatest composer of American musical theatre.  CompanyA Little Night Music (with the classic Send in the Clowns).  Sweeney ToddSunday in the Park with George.  And Into the Woods.  Just to name a few. 

Then there’s Elton John.  Who made the piano a bona fide rock instrument.  Some of the best music in the Seventies was his.  If you lived then you owned some or all of these albums.  Madman Across the WaterHonky ChâteauDon’t Shoot Me I’m Only the Piano Player.  Goodbye Yellow Brick RoadCaribouCaptain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy.  And how about Freddie Mercury?  Perhaps the greatest rock front-man of all time.  The talent in Queen was deep but it was Freddie that packed those stadiums.  Can anyone imagine Monty Python without Graham Chapman?  Or a Lord of the Rings without Sir Ian McKellen playing Gandalf?  We loved Lily Tomlin in Nine to Five and All of Me.  And who doesn’t love Jane Lynch in pretty much anything she’s in?  Ellen DeGeneres’ standup made you laugh.  And Liberace just made you smile.  What a sad, gray world it would be without these people in our lives.

The point is not that the LGBT community is here to entertain us.  Or to fund our politics.  It’s that they are here.  And our lives are better because of it.  We’ve grown to love some of these people.  Some before ever knowing their sexual orientation.  But when we learned that Graham Chapman was gay it didn’t stop anyone from loving Monty Python.  Or Graham Chapman.  So when the day comes when they can identify a gay gene in your unborn baby this is what we could lose.  This rich tapestry from our lives.  And that would be a shame.  Interestingly, though, it would bring the same-sex marriage and the traditional marriage groups together on one issue.  Abortion.  Or their opposition to abortion.  At least in opposition to abortions of LGBT pregnancies. 

Like I said, these are very complex and polarizing issues. 

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,