Highlights from today's newspaper (disclaimer: I only read the comics and Opinion Exchange):
"It's clear voters are both angry and confused" by Ann McFeatters
A concise description of a wide-reaching problem: Our form of government rests on an informed public and rational, meaningful debate. Whoops. As my first voting year (sorry to keep bringing that up) I feel a lot of pressure to learn about every side of every topic and every position of every candidate. Kind of overwhelming, but I would feel worse about voting nilly-willy, or not voting at all.
"Gay-marriage efforts build, ominously" by Katherine Kersten
I make it a point to read Kersten because she makes me clench my fists and not know whether to laugh or cry. Mostly the same for this column, but it raises some legal issues I hadn't thought of, mostly regarding churches/religious charities and their relationship to taxes. Plus the thing at University of California.
What do you guys think? Have these already been addressed by same-sex marriage supporters? Point me toward counterarguments if you know of them, please. Or write some, you all have nice pretty blogs.
3. http://www.gocomics.com/culdesac/2010/07/18/
Current favorite (physical) comic strip. I, too, suffer from drivelalia factosis.
Thank you for reading. The primary purpose of this post was to postpone writing that essay on the relationship between basic science and healthcare. On the (second) mcat I wrote two reasonably well-reasoned essays in under an hour...why can't that happen again?
In other news, the guinea pig is still a fat bum and my sister is officially faster, stronger, and taller than me.
By the way, your background has exploded.
ReplyDeleteKersten's article failed to acknowledge one of the most basic tenets of the bill of rights. The separation of church and state. Because they're not currently intermingling (although it seems many people would like to think so). And it's not like the government is going to FORCE churches to marry same-sex couples.
The fact is, we already call these people bigots for not letting same-sex couples have equal legal and social rights and privileges. Kersten makes it sound as if we are objected to the idea of a family being run by a man and a woman, and that's completely absurd. She's being a rude, irrational traditionalist.
Also, kids don't need opposite sex parents. It's been shown an embarassing number of times, including those raised by single parents (including Barack Obama, but that's why he's so SCREWY probably).
In the end, these people just don't want government overstepping it's bounds, but in the end, by not granted equal liberties, it is overstepping it's bounds by ignoring the very document that binds it.
viva la revolution!