These Search Engines Are Interesting Things

Given the sad news today in respect to the Washington State Court's same sex marriage ruling, the mind started thinking towards the referendum in Wisconsin.

I tend to believe that if someone proclaims that they want to protect marriage, then they should ban divorce, plain and simple.

In fact, let's go all the way and start arranging mandatory heterosexual marriages for all children from the second they are born. They can take a personality test and find their ideal partner for life. (I can find that ideal woman out there who won't complain one bit when I refuse to have sex with her, instead preferring clandestine nude all-male trysts in my car.)

And since marriage is an institution made purely for reproductive purposes, I suggest that we now make it illegal for any sterile people to marry. (IVF for those of us who aren't naturally inclined that way.)

And now back to reality.

Now, the architect behind the referendum, Mark Gundrum, is a lawyer. Turns out that he's a lawyer in a firm that handles divorce cases.

It makes me wonder what his real motivations are behind pushing this.

Perhaps Gundrum is afraid that since gay & lesbian couples tend to stay together longer that he'll see a downturn in divorce cases and income.

Or perhaps he's afraid that he may get overworked since there wouldn't be a need for sham hetero marriages in Wisconsin (not that it's a threat at the moment since the law already defines marriage as solely heterosexual right).

But Marky, you really aren't fighting for your best interests. You should be fighting for it.

You're already spearheading the fight to make marriage cheaper, so why not expand it?

So clearly your interest here is money not morals. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Marky, but if you want marriage to be cheaper so that more people will get married, then shouldn't you want everybody to get married?

And if you believe so strongly in the institution of marriage, then how come you have basically made your living out of participating in its destruction?

I find it rather interesting, Marky, that your infamous quote "This is the time in particular when people need to re-enforce the institution of marriage, not reinvent it," is coming from a man who is actively trying to reinvent marriage.

I find it rather interesting that you refuse to even give out your positions on pressing issues facing the country to Vote Smart. Does your ability to be elected and stay in office rely upon people being ignorant of what you stand for? And if so, then why are you flying the homophobic flag so--dare I say it--proudly this time?

Marky, I think it's time you start realising that the 1950's are over and will not return. I think you need to start realising that just as integrated schools and interracial marriage did not cause the US to descend into anarchy, that maybe, just maybe, it won't mean that your marriage will suddenly be worthless.

Then again, if you feel that your marriage will disappear with same sex marriage legalised (and I hasten to point out again that it is not legal in Wisconsin), that probably means it was built on a shakier foundation than you'd like the rest of us to know about and that the lesbian couple who has been together for decades might be a bit more savvy in how to keep a relationship going than you do.

All in all, this just makes you look like a bully on the playground who got pissed since now he's the one with the wedgie.