I got this from my blogging friend Roadie who got it from...well, I don't know where he got it from but this is great little post. Sometimes humor delivers the truth better than anything else does. Enjoy!
San Francisco City Hall
Morning at San Francisco City Hall
"Next"
"We want to apply for a marriage license."
"Names?"
"Tim and Jim Jones."
"Jones? Are you related? I see a resemblance."
"Yes, we're brothers."
"Brothers? You can't get married."
"Why not? Aren't you giving marriage licenses to same gender couples?"
"Yes, thousands. But we haven't had any siblings. That's incest!"
"Incest? No, we are not gay."
"Not gay? Then why do you want to get married?"
"For the financial benefits, of course. And we do love each other. Besides, we don't have any other prospects."
"But we're issuing marriage licenses to gay and lesbian couples who've been denied equal protection under the law. If you're not gay you can get married to a woman."
"Wait a minute. A gay man has the same right to marry a woman as I have. Just because I'm straight doesn't mean I want to marry a woman. I want to marry Jim."
"And I want to marry Tim. Are you going to discriminate against us just because we're not gay?" "All right, all right. I'll give you your license. Next."
"Hi. We are here to get married."
"Names?"
"John Smith, Jane James, Robert Green, and June Johnson."
"Who wants to marry whom?"
"We all want to marry each other."
"But there are four of you!"
"That's right. You see, we're all bisexual. I love Jane and Robert. Jane loves me and June. June loves Robert and Jane. And Robert loves June and me. All of us getting married together is the only way we can express our sexual preferences in a marital relationship."
"But we've only been granting licenses to gay and lesbian couples."
"So you're discriminating against bisexuals!"
"No. It's just that, well, the traditional idea of marrige is that it's just for couples."
"Since when are you standing on tradition?"
"Well, I mean, you have to draw the line somewhere."
"Who says? There's no logical reason to limit marriage to couples. Besides, we demand our rights! The mayor says the constitution guarantees equal protection under the law. Give us a marriage license!"
"All right, all right. Next."
"Hello, I'd like a marriage license."
"In what names?"
"David Deets."
"And the other man?"
"That's all. I want to marry myself."
"Marry yourself? What do you mean?"
"Well, my psychiatrist says I have a dual personality, so I want to marry the two together. Maybe I can file a joint income tax return."
"That does it. I quit!"
See, I told you humor sometimes speaks the truth better than anything else can. Thanks Roadie!
Showing posts with label Marriage. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Marriage. Show all posts
Friday, July 11, 2008
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Let's Legalize Polygamy
I support polygamy. I probably wouldn't practice it myself but I believe it should be legal for anyone who wishes to marry that way. There, I said it. This may seem like a strange thing to advocate on a blog dedicated to family values, but here me out.
Most people, at least most Westerners, have a visceral dislike of polygamy. Through media reports and feminist propaganda we've come to regard polygamy as a singularly destructive force, fundamentally oppressive to women. While millions in our country can fathom two men or two women marrying, the thought of one man having two or more wives is just repugnant. It shouldn't be that way.
Polygamy has a long and venerable history. It has been practiced on all continents, among all races, and in all religions. We in the Judeo-Christian West mistakenly believe that the Bible condemns plural marriage but that is not so. Most of the Old Testament Patriarchs, prophets, and kings had multiple wives with no reprimand from God. The Mosaic Law regulates polygamy but does not forbid it. True, the New Testament commands Church leaders to have only one wife, but that prohibition doesn't necessarily apply to the whole Christian community. Indeed, the very fact that Church leaders are allowed only one wife suggests that polygamy was common among first century Christians. After all, why make the "one wife" rule if monogamy was the sole form of Christian marriage?
Devout Jews, Christians, and others who draw their morality from the Bible can support plural marriage in good conscience. It is not solely the practice of fundamentalist Mormons hell bent on suppressing women. Many non-Mormon women, as well as men, can and do enter into polgamy of their own free will, with the intention of creating loving marriages and strong families. Why should they be subjected to legal and/or moral sanction for a marriage that is heterosexual and of their own choosing?
Besides, our sanction against polygamy is profoundly hypocritical. We are a society that boasts of our sexual tolerance. We accept promiscuity as normal, even teaching it to our children. Pornography is a multibillion dollar business. Homosexuality is openly practiced. We tolerate a destructive "subpolygamy" where men procreate with multiple women with no legal or financial committment to them or their children. We wink at adultery and laugh at Hugh Hefner having three live in girlfriends, but God forbid he should have three wives!
God forbid that a man should bind himself to two or more women in a formal commitment, pledging to them love, loyalty, and support. God forbid that a man should be a father to their children, eagerly embracing the financial as well as emotional demands of that role. God forbid that two or more women should lovingly help each other in the mothering of their children. God forbid that a man and two or more women should commit themselves to creating a stable family unit where bedrock values such as love, responsibility, faith, and hard work are diligently taught to the next generation. God forbid!
It's time to rise above our knee jerk disdain for plural marriage. We must admit that we have to accept polygamy along with the other non-traditional families we're so quick to celebrate. It's all about diversity, right? And polygamy has at least the potential to give children a far more constructive upbringing than some of the other alternative families most of us have no problem with. In the end we can't have it both ways. If we reject polygamy then we must also stop watching The Girls Next Door. Honesty and common sense demand it.
Most people, at least most Westerners, have a visceral dislike of polygamy. Through media reports and feminist propaganda we've come to regard polygamy as a singularly destructive force, fundamentally oppressive to women. While millions in our country can fathom two men or two women marrying, the thought of one man having two or more wives is just repugnant. It shouldn't be that way.
Polygamy has a long and venerable history. It has been practiced on all continents, among all races, and in all religions. We in the Judeo-Christian West mistakenly believe that the Bible condemns plural marriage but that is not so. Most of the Old Testament Patriarchs, prophets, and kings had multiple wives with no reprimand from God. The Mosaic Law regulates polygamy but does not forbid it. True, the New Testament commands Church leaders to have only one wife, but that prohibition doesn't necessarily apply to the whole Christian community. Indeed, the very fact that Church leaders are allowed only one wife suggests that polygamy was common among first century Christians. After all, why make the "one wife" rule if monogamy was the sole form of Christian marriage?
Devout Jews, Christians, and others who draw their morality from the Bible can support plural marriage in good conscience. It is not solely the practice of fundamentalist Mormons hell bent on suppressing women. Many non-Mormon women, as well as men, can and do enter into polgamy of their own free will, with the intention of creating loving marriages and strong families. Why should they be subjected to legal and/or moral sanction for a marriage that is heterosexual and of their own choosing?
Besides, our sanction against polygamy is profoundly hypocritical. We are a society that boasts of our sexual tolerance. We accept promiscuity as normal, even teaching it to our children. Pornography is a multibillion dollar business. Homosexuality is openly practiced. We tolerate a destructive "subpolygamy" where men procreate with multiple women with no legal or financial committment to them or their children. We wink at adultery and laugh at Hugh Hefner having three live in girlfriends, but God forbid he should have three wives!
God forbid that a man should bind himself to two or more women in a formal commitment, pledging to them love, loyalty, and support. God forbid that a man should be a father to their children, eagerly embracing the financial as well as emotional demands of that role. God forbid that two or more women should lovingly help each other in the mothering of their children. God forbid that a man and two or more women should commit themselves to creating a stable family unit where bedrock values such as love, responsibility, faith, and hard work are diligently taught to the next generation. God forbid!
It's time to rise above our knee jerk disdain for plural marriage. We must admit that we have to accept polygamy along with the other non-traditional families we're so quick to celebrate. It's all about diversity, right? And polygamy has at least the potential to give children a far more constructive upbringing than some of the other alternative families most of us have no problem with. In the end we can't have it both ways. If we reject polygamy then we must also stop watching The Girls Next Door. Honesty and common sense demand it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
